The burden of proof on the weight and number of packages stated in the railway receipt lies on the consignor, consignee, or endorsee if not checked by railway staff.

JUDGMENT :

DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.

Heard Ms. M. Sarma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. B. Sarma, learned standing counsel, appearing on behalf of the NF Railways.

2. The facts for the instant case arising for determination is that one Sai Baba Salt Limited through M/s Decent Enterprises have booked 42 wagons purportedly loading 67120 wagons of Non-refined Iodized Salt in Halvad station which was to be delivered at Dibrugarh station. The said consignment was sent to one M/s Prakash Floor Mill A/c Deputy Commissioner. The railway receipt on which the said loading was done has been enclosed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. It may be relevant herein to take note of that in the said Railway receipt the commodity description and the remarks have been mentioned is the same has relevance to the adjudication of the instant writ petition, the same is quoted herein below:

"Non refined salt for human consumption (Rake demand) Train load conditions complied with # loaded directly from truck/car to wagon, loading not supervised by Railway Staff. # Loading done in siding, not supervised by Railway Staff # Sender's weight accepted # said to contain # Load condition fulfilled Default # the base FT for 3139.00 kms @@@@2323.000/T after rebate comes to Rs.4476188.700. However, the base FT for 3000 KMS comes to Rs.4532479.872. Hence charged Rs.4532479.870 i.e. The higher base FT ### sales tax not application# bank draft 000786 05-09- 14 HDFC Rs.4543811.00"

3. Before further delving upon the facts, it would be relevant to take note of the provisions of Sec. 65 of the Railway Act 1989, which is quoted herein below:

"Sec. 65. Railway receipt.-

(1) A railway administration shall,-

(a) in a case where the goods are to be loaded by a person entrusting such goods, on the completion of such loading; or

(b) in any other case, on the acceptance of the goods by it, issue a railway receipt in such form as may be specified by the Central Government.

(2) A railway receipt shall be prima facie evidence of the weight and the number of packages stated therein:

Provided that in the case of a consignment in wagon- load or trainload and the weight or the number of packages is not checked by a railway servant authorized in this behalf, and a statement to that effect is recorded in such railway receipt by him, the burden of proving the weight or, as the case may be, the number of packages stated therein, shall lie on the consignor, the consignee or the endorsee."

4. For the purpose of understanding the purported of the quoted portion of the Railway receipt, it is relevant to take note of that a Railway receipt shall be a prima facie evidence of the weight and the number of packages stated therein. However, in view of the proviso added to the Sub-Sec. 2 of Sec. 65 in the case of consignment in wagon load or train load and the weight or the number of packages is not checked by the Railway servant authorized in that behalf and a statement to that effect is recorded in such Railway receipt by him, the burden of proving the weight or the as the case may be the number of packages stated therein shall lie on the consigner, consignee or the endorsee.

5. In the backdrop of the above, it is also relevant to take not of the facts involved in the instant case. The loading of the 42 wagons of Non-refined Iodized Salt at Halvad Station was done by one Gupta and Associates (Assessors) Private Limited at the behest of M/s Decent Enterprise for loading supervision of the consignment and random weight checking at Halvad Railway Station. The said consignment reached Dibrugarh on 14/9/2014. The petitioner firm reached the station for taking delivery of the said goods and submitted the original Railway receipt and took the delivery. Although, at paragraph 5 of the writ petition, it has been alleged that while taking delivery it came to the notice of the petitioner that all the 42 wagons carrying the said consignment were seal defective condition without any seals a