CHHAGANLAL SHALIGRAM SHET Vs. EAST INDIAN RAILWAY COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case we have no doubt that on the merits the plaintiff was entitled to a decree.

(2.) In the first Court one of the defences was that the defendant's servant had no authority to divert the consignment and that therefore the defendant was not bound by the Act of the servant.

(3.) In the District Court this defence was disallowed by the District Judge, who held that the Station Master at Kamptee was guility of default in directing the delivery of the goods to the original consignee but the District Judge further held that the defendant Company was not liable for the Act of the Station Master which was not within the scope of his authority (quoting Section 238 of the Contract Act).