1. This is an appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 preferred by N.F. Railways challenging the judgment and award dated 30.07.2007 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal at Guwahati in O.A. No. 459/2000. By that judgment, the learned Tribunal directed the railway authorities to make payment of compensation to the claimant respondent to the tune of Rs. 71,400/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum if the payment is not made within a period of 60 days from the date of order.

2. Respondent M/s Sunrise Traders filed a claim petition before the Railway Claims Tribunal at Guwahati stating that it is owner of 951 packets of onion booked in safe, sound and secured condition meeting all legal formalities as per railway rules at Manmad Railway Station in Maharastra. The consignment was booked by Maharastra State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited for delivery at New Guwahati. The booking was made on 20/22.03.2000 and same was delivered on 04.04.2000 whereupon it was found that the wagon doors were kept open, wagon roof was leaky and also water marked condition on the roofs and side walls. The consignment was found wet damaged and in rotten condition emitting foul smell. Wagon seals were absent and on unloading of 441 packets of onion were found to be in total damaged condition. The claimant, therefore, claimed Rs. 99,960/- for 14280 Kg of onions at the rate of Rs. 7/- per Kg.

3. Upon receipt of such claim petition, O.A. No. 459/2000 was registered and notices were issued to the N.F. Railway who appeared and submitted written statement on 21.03.2002. In paragraph 3 of the reply the N.F. Railway claimed that the wagon holding the onion consignment arrived at destination station with original seals and rivets intact condition without any interference enroute. Rather, the alleged damage to the goods was due to loading of already damaged goods by the sender at forwarding station and as such respondent is not at all liable for any compensation. Subsequently, on 17.07.2007 an additional written statement was submitted stating that the railway receipt shows that ‘said to contain’ clause would apply to the consignment and that it was a case of direct loading from truck to wagon. It was further mentioned that doors of the wagon were kept open at the specific request of the sender at his own risk as regard to pilferages. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings of the parties, the Railway Claims Tribunal framed as many as 4 (four) issues as follows:-

1. Whether the applicant proves that he has got the proper title to file application for compensation?

2. Whether the applicant proves that 951 bags of onion was booked under Inv/RR No. 258/578004 dated 20/22.03.2000 in good condition?

3. Whether the applicant proves that 441 bags of onion were found in damaged condition and cost is Rs. 99,960/-?

4. Relief, if any?

4. Neither of the parties led any evidence but they placed their respective records. It appears that Railway produced some records containing the forwarding note, the true copy of the report of the train examiner and the railway receipt to the Tribunal for perusal.

5. Upon consideration of these materials, the learned Tribunal passed impugned judgment and award on 30.07.2007 holding that the applicant proved that he got proper authority to file the application for compensation as the Maharastra State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited, Mumbai served and endorsed to the claimant who is applicant in the present case. The issue No. 1 was accordingly decided in favour of the claimant. Issue No. 2 was decided by holding that as per forwarding note by the respondent N.F. Railway, there were 951 packets of onion booked by the consignor on 20/22.03.2000. Accordingly, issue No. 2 was decided in favour of the claimant. Issue No. 3 is in regard to damaged condition of 441 bags and the price thereof. Considering the delivery certificate-cum- A/D report dated 04.04.2000 placed and records of t