MADAN LALL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole question for determination in the present appeal is a question of limitation. The question is when limitation is to commence under Article 31 of the Indian Limitation Act, in the case of non-delivery of goods, if no request for delivery of non-delivered goods has been made, but only a claim for compensation for non-delivery of the goods has been made in terms of Section 77, Indian Railways Act? In other words, in such a case, how is the expression "when the goods ought to be delivered" occurring in the third column of Article 31 to be construed to mean and when time would begin to run under Article31.

(2.) Plaintiffs have appealed from the judgment of Mr. T. P. Mukherji, Subordinate Judge of Darbhanga, dismissing their suit for damages for non-delivery of 120 bags of linseed weighing 273 maunds, which were despatched by them from Samastipur Railway Station, on the then O. T. Railway, for delivery at Lilloah, a station on the then E. I. Railway.

(3.) The above consignment was booked on the 121th June, 1948, and on the evidence it should have been delivered latest by the 30ih June, 1948, but it was never delivered to the consignee at all. The plaintiffs, the consignors, therefore, sent a notice under Section 77, Indian Railways Act, and thereafter several letters to the Railway Authorities of both the Railways, but they did not receive any reply promising delivery of the goods, or payment of the price thereof as claimed, and, therefore, they brought the present suit, out of which the present appeal arises for damages for non-delivery, after service of a notice under Section 80, Civil Procedure Code.