Judgment

RAY, J. :- (on behalf of himself and Dua, J.) We have had the advantage of reading the judgment written by our learned brother Mathew.

2. The question which falls for determination in this appeal is whether the respondent mill on recovering Rs. 32,254-6-9 from the Indian Globe Insurance Co. Ltd. and assigning all rights against the Railway Administration in favour of the insurance company as a subrogee was competent to institute and maintain the suit against the Railway Administration.

3. We agree with the reasoning and conclusion of our learned brother Mathew that subrogation does not confer any independent right on underwriters to maintain in their own name and without reference to the persons assured an action for damage to the thing insured. The right of the assured is not one of those rights which are incident to the property insured.

4. Counsel for the appellant contention that by reason of the assignment to the insurance company of all rights against the Railway Administration the respondent mill did not have any cause of action against the Railway Administration. In aid of that contention the decisions in King v. Victoria Insurance Co. Ltd., 1896 A.C. 250 and Compania