The railway administration is liable for the loss of goods caused by the misconduct of its servants, even in the absence of proof that the loss was caused by the misconduct.

( 1 ) THE salient facts involved in this appeal are not in dispute. A consignment of 222 bags of potatoes weighing 444 maunds was despatched from Patna Ghat railway station on the Eastern Railway on 2nd May, 1950, to Mograhat railway; station, the consignor being one Lakhi Chand Sha and the consignee being Mohatam Ram Subedau Singh. The goods were loaded in a wagon with an iron floor on the consignor's responsibility who also duly executed risk note in forms A and B. The wagon was attached to Down goods train No. 214 and when that train reached Jhanja station on 4th May, 1950, the wagon containing the potatoes was deiached and detained at that station till 11th May, 1950, on which date it was attached to another goods train. The consignment ultimately reached Mograhat station on 15th May, 1950, when the Station Master found that the entire stock of potatoes had decomposed so much that the potatoes were totally unfit for human consumption. Thereafter the potatoes were destroyed under the orders of the Health Officer of Mograhat and made over to West Bengal Government for purposes of manure.

( 2 ) UPON the above admitted facts the plaintiff contended that the goods were of perishable character and there were gross negligence and misconduct on the part of railway officers in not delivering the goods within reasonable time and the loss occasioned to the plaintiff was caused by such negligence and misconduct. The plaintiff claimed a sum of Rs. 4773/- by way of compensation for such loss.

( 3 ) THE defence of the Union of India which represents the Eastern Railway Administration was that the railway administration had no liability because there was no negligence or misconduct on the part of any railway officer and, in any event, the loss, if any, was not attributable to such negligence or misconduct.

( 4 ) THE trial court accepted the defence of the defendant and dismissed the suit. In appeal the lower appellate court reversed the decree of dismissal passed by the trial court and decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff. This second appeal has been preferred by the Union of India.

( 5 ) TWO points have arisen for our consideration in this appeal. First, whether there was any misconduct on the part of railway officers in the carriage of the goods from Patnaghat to Mograhat railway station. Secondly whether any loss was caused to the plaintiff by reason of such misconduct. The alleged misconduct in the present case consisted in carrying the goods which were known to be of a perishable character to the destination station after an unusual and unreasonable delay which was not accounted for by the railway administration. It is an admitted fact that the goods train to which the wagon containing the disputed consignment was attached, reached Jhanja on 4th May, 1950. The wagon in question was detached from the goods train at that station and was detained for seven days after which it was despatched on 11th May, 1950, by being attached to another goods train. This period of detention, which was a fairly long period considering the nature of the goods, was sought to be explained on behalf of the appellant by making out a case of scarcity of locomotives, congestion in the railway yard at Jhanja and derailment of 5 Up Punjab Mail train a few miles down Jhanja station. These explanations were not accepted by the lower appellate court although they were considered to be sufficient by the trial court. In our opinion these explanations about the detention of the wagon at Jhanja are completely wide of the mark, because no explanation has been forthcoming at all to show whether there was any necessity for detaching the wagon at Jhanja. It is in evidence that the down goods train No. 214 to which the wagon was attached from Patnaghat travelled right up to Asansol. The potatoes in question had been loaded in a full wagon. It would appear from the evidence of Sri S. N. Mallik who was working as Goods Clerk at Patnaghat at