Section 80 of the Railways Act, as amended in 1961, is a complete Code regarding the Courts before whom suits referred to therein can be filed. Section 20 of the Civil Procedure Code is impliedly repealed by section 80 of the Railways Act.

JUDGMENT-This appeal is filed from the decision of the learned Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay, given on the Defendants Notice of Motion No. 2759 of 1980 in Long Cause Suit No. 4847 of 1970.

2. The respondents to this appeal are the two plaintiffs who filed the said suit. The defendants to the suit who are the appellants before me are the Union of India who are sued as owners of the Northern Railway and the Central Rail way and acting through their respective General Managers at New Delhi and V. T. Bombay-1.

3. The plaintiffs to the suit are the Indian Hume Pipe Company Ltd., a public limited Company, having its registered office at Bombay, and the New Great Insurance Company of India Limited, also originally a public Limited Company having its principal place of business at Churchgate Reclamation, Bombay. It may be mentioned that the suit is of 1970 and during the decade, the 2nd plaintiffs have been nationalised and thereafter must have been merged with one of the four Government Corporation which are now carrying on the nationalised general insurance business.

4. As the summary of the pleadings would indicate, the claim is in effect and substance by the Insurance Company, whose shares are now entirely owned by the Government of India, against the Railway Administrations which are also owned by the Government of India. This is on the fooling that plaintiff No. 1 has been paid its claim regarding damages by the Insurance Company and the rights of plaintiff No. 1 must have on such payment been subrogated to plaintiff No.2. It is sad to observe that the Government Corporation or Departments are still litigating inter se in the Civil Courts and choking the dockets of the Courts by such litigation without evolving a separate machinery to resolve or adjudicate such disputes. Time and again the need for evolving such machinery has been emphasised, but the wheels of the Government are moving very slowly, if at all.

5. To turn back to the facts as appear in the pleadings, it would seem that certain consignments were handed over to the Central Rail way at Lucknow (Industrial Area Siding) in U. P. by Indian Hume. Pipe Company for carriage to Lalitpur (M. P.) on the Central Railway. The consignments which were of R. C. C. Hume Pipe and Collars were accepted for carriage at railway risk. These fourteen consignments were offered for delivery by the Central Railway at Lalitpur to the consignees concerned in damaged condition. A number of damage certificates were issued after assessment and these certificates are indicated in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the plaint. According to the plaintiffs the loss suffered by the first plaintiff company in consequence of the breakage of the pipes and collars came to Rs. 11,731-44. The plaintiffs have claimed that this loss was occasioned by the negligent manner of carriage and accordingly have sued the defendants for reimbursement in respect of the said damage suffered by them. In paragraph 7 of the plaint the plaintiffs have explained how the second plaintiffs viz. the New Great Insurance Company came to be joined as party plaintiffs.

6. Paragraph 11 is the jurisdiction clause in the plaint and the same reads as follows:

"The defendants are carrying on their business in Bombay at the headquarters of the Central Railway. The plaintiffs, therefore, submit that this Hon. Court had jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit."

The necessary written statement was filed, though somewhat belatedly, by the defendants in March/April 1974. In paragraph 11 of the said written statement a plea has been taken that the City Civil Court at Bombay has no jurisdiction to try the suit. It was also sought that the suit should accordingly be dismissed with costs. It may be mentioned that this plea is contrary to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code which directs a return of the plaint to the plaintiffs for being presented to the proper Court if it is ascertained that the Court in which the suit is filed bas no jurisd

Click Here to Read the rest of this document