RAMACHANDRA NATHA Vs. GREAT INDIAN PENINSULA RAILWAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a case in which the plaintiffs have claimed damages from the Great Indian Peninsula Railway Company on account of certain goods, which were destroyed after they had been placed on the Railway Company s premises and which the plaintiffs allege in perfect had been delivered to the Company for the purpose of carriage by Railway. The suit was disposed of by a Judge of the Court of Small Causes at Bombay in favour of the defendant, and after a hearing before the Full Bench the same conclusion was reached.

(2.) An application was made to this Court by the plaintiffs, a Rule was issued and we have heard the matter fully argued. As neither the applicants nor the opponent, have any objection to our disposing of this matter, I do not propose to say anything on the question of pur jurisdiction except that so far as I am enabled to form an opinion in the absence of arguments, I do not see any serious reason to doubt that we have jurisdiction.

(3.) Section 72, so far as it covers this case, runs as follows: The responsibility of a Railway administration for the loss, destruction or deterioration of animals or goods delivered to the administration to be carried by Railway shall, subject to the other provisions of this Act, be that of a bailee under sections 51, 152 and 161 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872