SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1963 Supreme(Cal) 162

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
D. N. SINHA, K. MUKHERJEE
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) - Appellant
Versus
EAST BENGAL RIVER STEAMER SERVICE LTD. - Respondent
A. F. O. D.  224  Of  1958
Decided On : JULY 25, 1963

Advocates Appeared:
AMIYA KUMAR BOSE, B.M.Das, G.P.KAR, Sisir Mukherjee

Headnote:

The Governor-General in Council had the authority to requisition the vessel under Rule 89 of the Defence of India Rules. The liability arising out of the requisition of the vessel was a statutory liability and not a contractual liability. The liability devolved on the Dominion of India after the partition of India under Article 10 of the Indian Independence (Rights, Property and Liabilities) Order, 1947. The liability was a joint liability of the Dominions of India and Pakistan. The suit against the Union of India was maintainable in the absence of the Government of Pakistan. The rate of compensation was Rs. 500/- per day for the period from April 13 to August 6, 1944.

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff company was the owner of a tug or vessel called "madanmonan". On or at-cut February 28, 1944 the plaintiff company were served with a letter issued by the Regional Controller of Priorities (River) of the then Government of India enclosing copy of an order of the said Government. The order was No. 294 of 19th February, 1944 passed under Sub-rule (2) read with Sub-rule (5) of Rule 89 of the Defence of India Rules. This order is the foundation of the plaintiff's claims and should therefore be set out in extenso:"in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (2) read with Sub-rule (5) of the Rule 89 of the Defence of India Rules, the Central Government is pleased to order that the Companies specified in the schedule hereto annexed snail comply with any directions given from time to time by the Deputy Director of Movement, Cal-cutta, or Dy Mr. J. Aitken and the said directions may require the said companies to use any vessel, steamer, coat, barge or other craft in their possession or under their control plying in inland waters in the Provinces of Bengal, Bihar and Assam, for the conveyance of such persons or goods at such time and by such routes as may be set forth in the directions".

Finding of the Court:

The Governor-General in Council had the authority to requisition the vessel under Rule 89 of the Defence of India Rules. The liability arising out of the requisition of the vessel was a statutory liability and not a contractual liability. The liability devolved on the Dominion of India after the partition of India under Article 10 of the Indian Independence (Rights, Property and Liabilities) Order, 1947. The liability was a joint liability of the Dominions of India and Pakistan. The suit against the Union of India was maintainable in the absence of the Government of Pakistan. The rate of compensation was Rs. 500/- per day for the period from April 13 to August 6, 1944.

Issues: 1. Has any part of the cause of action arisen within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court? 2. Was a valid notice under Section 80 at the C. P. C. served on the Governor-General in Council? 3. Is the liability to the plaintiff, if any, that of the Pakistan or India? 4. Did the Railway accept and/or agree to pay Rs. 600/- per day charged in the plaintiff's bill dated September 14, 1944? 5. Is the rate of Rs. 600/- per day cnarged by the plaintiff reasonable hire of price of the vessel? 6. How long was the vessel in the service of the Railway? 7. Is the plaintiff entitled to compensation as pleaded in paragraph 3 and alternatively in paragraph i of the plaint? 8. Is the plaintiff entitled to any relief? If so, what?

Ratio Decidendi: The liability arising out of the requisition of the vessel was a statutory liability and not a contractual liability. The liability devolved on the Dominion of India after the partition of India under Article 10 of the Indian Independence (Rights, Property and Liabilities) Order, 1947. The liability was a joint liability of the Dominions of India and Pakistan. The suit against the Union of India was maintainable in the absence of the Government of Pakistan. The rate of compensation was Rs. 500/- per day for the period from April 13 to August 6, 1944.

Final Decision: The appeal is dismissed with costs.

MUKHERJEA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal from a judgment and decree dated 12th May, 1958 of Datta, J. the tacts of the case are quite simple and may be briefly set out as follows:--

( 2 ) THE plaintiff Company are the owners of a tug or vessel called "madanmonan". On or at-cut February 28, 1944 the plaintiff company were served with a letter issued by the Regional Controller of Priorities (River) of the then Government of India enclosing copy of an order of the said Government. The order was No. 294 of 19th February, 1944 passed under Sub-rule (2) read with Sub-rule (5) of Rule 89 of the Defence of India Rules. This order is the foundation of the plaintiff's claims and should therefore be set out in extenso:--"in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (2) read with Sub-rule (5) of the Rule 89 of the Defence of India Rules, the Central Government is pleased to order that the Companies specified in the schedule hereto annexed snail comply with any directions given from time to time by the Deputy Director of Movement, Cal-cutta, or Dy Mr. J. Aitken and the said directions may require the said companies to use any vessel, steamer, coat, barge or other craft in their possession or under their control plying in inland waters in the Provinces of Bengal, Bihar and Assam, for the conveyance of such persons or goods at such time and by such routes as may be set forth in the directions".

( 3 ) THEREAFTER, on April 11, 1944 the plaintiff received another letter from the said Deputy Regional Controller of Priorities to the following effect:--"your steamer Madan Mohan is required for work at Tistamukh. Please despatch her to Tistamukh where she should arrive by 18th instant at the latest. Pilots as necessary will be provided by the Joint Steamer Companies. The Madan Mohan's draft would not under any circumstances exceed 6'. Rebunkering as required in route should be arranged. The vessel should be manned for 24 hours duty per day. The vessel should report to the Marine superintendent, B and A Railway or his representative, Asst. Marine Superintendent, Tistamukh on arrival and act on his Instructions. The financial adjustment and other terms will be one for settlement between you and the B and A Railway but they should not interfere with the despatch of the Madan Mohan to Tistamukh".

( 4 ) PURSUANT to the above two letters the plaintiff placed the steamer "madan Mohan" at the disposal of the Deputy Regional Controller of Priorities. The vessel, it is alleged, reported at Tistamukh and plied between Tistamukh Ghat and Bahadurabad Ghat in Accordance with the instructions of the officers of the B and A Railway. The vessel seems to have operated between these two points for about two months after which the vessel was released by the B and A Railway officers working at Tistamukn sometime about August 6, 1944 whereupon the vessel came (under its own steam) to Calcutta where the vessel underwent various repairs between August 16 and September 14, 1944. Under a letter dated 19th September, 1944 the plaintiff company submitted a bill dated 14th September, 1944 for Rs. 81,000/- to the Marine Superintendent, B and A Railway, Amingaon. Both the letter and the bill show that the bill was for "ture of S. L. Madan Mohan between April 13, 1944 and September 14, 1944. It is indicated on the body of the bill that the "vessel arrived in Calcutta on 15th August, 1944 from Tistamukh Ghat and was under repairs from 16th August to 14th September 1944". The bill is for two amounts one for Rs. 75,000/- being hire at the rate of Rs. 600/- per diem for the period April 13, 1944 to August 15, 1944 and the other for Rs. 6,000/- being hire at the rate of Rs. 200/- per dlem for the period August 16, 1944 to September 14, 1944. Subsequently on November 29, 1944 another bill was submitted by the plaintiff to the Assistant marine Superintendent, B and A railway, Tistamukh Ghat, for Rs. 6519-12-0. This biil, on the face of it, relates to the repairs of the vessel. On Nov

































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top