The main legal point established in the judgment is the liberal interpretation of technical compliance with the notice requirements under Section 80, CPC, and the emphasis on the purpose of providing an opportunity for settlement without litigation.

( 1 ) THIS Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in R. A. No. 6/90 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Shimoga. The first appellate Court while dismissing the appeal confirmed the decree passed by the Court of Civil Judge, in O. S. No. 13/83 wherein the plaintiff's suit was dismissed. A few facts briefly stated are thus:

( 2 ) THE plaintiff field a suit for recovery of Rs. 92,282-20 being the value of the consignment despatched. Since the same was not delivered at the intended destination the plaintiff caused a notice through his Advocate dated 22-6-1982 addressed to the General Manager, Southern Railways, Madras, The Chief Commercial Superintendent, Southern Railways, Madras and the Chief Commercial Superintendent, Jodhpur. It is also an admitted fact that the notice which was got issued by the plaintiff through his Advocate was not signed either by the party or by the Advocate. The plaintiff has got the copy of the notice marked as Ex. P-12, whereas the defendants have got the copy of Ex. P. 12 (another copy of the notice) marked as Ex. D-2.

( 3 ) FROM a perusal of Ex. P. 12 and Ex. D. 2 it could be stated that the contents of the notice are in pare-materia with each other and it is also to be noted that both these copies which have been marked through the parties do not bear the signature of the Advocate except his name being stated as 'b. R. Raghupathi'. For purposes of proper appreciation of the points canvassed by both the parties, the contents of Ex. P. 1 (Ex. D-2) are necessary which reads as follows:"from, sagar, Date. 22-6-1982 b. R. Raghupathi, advocate, Sagar, to, 1. General Manager, southern Railway, parte Town, Madras-3. 2. The Chief Commercial Superintendent, South Railway, Madras. 3. The Chief Commercial Superintendent, Northern Railway, Jodhpur, rajasthan. Under instructions from my client Sha Jetmal son of Sagarji resident of Sagar town I am issuing this legal notice under Section 80. , C. P. C. and also under Indian Railways Act. IN THE COURT OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AT SAGAR O. S. No. / 82 plaintiff: Sha Jetmal s/o Sagarji, major, r/o Sagar town, Shimoga District, Karnataka State. v. Defendant : 1. Chief Commercial Superintendent, Southern Railways, Madras. , 2. Secretary, Union of India, New Delhi. Under Order 7, Rule 1, CPC the plaintiff states as follows: 1. The names and address of the parties are as stated above in the cause title. 2. The plaintiff booked one wagon load of timber (sealed) from Sager-Jambagaru Railway Station to Mokalsar in Rajasthan, State under RR. No. 940919 on 22-5-1981. The timber was booked in Wagon No. SR. BKC 3782. One hundered thirty five logs were loaded in the wagon measuring in all 498-37 cft. The consignment was to be delivered at the destination by the defendant within the reasonable time. 3. The defendant has not delivered the consignment at the destination. As such the plaintiff lodged a claim in the DRM Commercial at Mysore. But plaintiff was asked to approach the Divisional Railway Manager (Commercial), Jodhpur. Though an approach was made to the latter no relief is given 4. Plaintiff has corresponded with the defendants authorities several times. But still the defendant has not delivered the consignment to the destination as per the R. R. Hence the plaintiff has suffered heavy loss. This suit is filed for recovery of the consignement dispatched or for the worth of timber booked in the wagon to be delivered at Mokalsar in Rajasthan. xx xx xx 5. Cause of action for this suit has arisen on 22-5-1981 at Sagar-Jambagar when wagon was booked and timber were loaded which is well within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. 6. Suit claim: teak timbers of 135 (or its value to logs measuring 496-37 be ascertained on cfts. , which has been the date of suit) in the wagon. Notice fee rs. 250-00 plaint reliefs: plaintiff prays for judgment and decree against defendants. (a) for delivery of the articles booked and handed over to t