ROBIN PHUKAN
Bajaj Trading Company – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Represented by the General Manager – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Robin Phukan, J.)
Heard Mr. D. Rathi, learned counsel for the appellant and also heard Ms. M. Chatterjee, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This miscellaneous first appeal, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.09.2012, passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, in Original Application No.OA-I-6/2011.
3. The back ground facts leading to filing of the present appeal is briefly stated as under:-
Hari Sao and Another vs. The State of Bihar reported in AIR 1970 SC 843
Sreeniwas Basudeo vs. Union of India And Ors. reported in 2002(1) GauLT 605
Union of India v. M/s Sunrise Traders
Union of India v. Roop Narayan
Union of India vs. Aluminium Industries Limited reported in AIR 1987 Ori 149(1)
Union of India vs. B.D. Jhunjhunwala
Union of India vs. Industrial Development Corporation of Orissa Limited reported in AIR 1995 Ori 298
The burden of proof for negligence in non-delivery lies with the consignor when goods are transported at owner's risk rate.
The burden of proof under Sec. 65 of the Railways Act, 1989 lies on the consignor, consignee, or endorsee to prove the number of packages stated in the Railway Receipt.
The Railway Administration is liable for non-delivery of goods delivered to unauthorized persons, confirming the Tribunal's jurisdiction and the legal obligations under the Railway and Contract Acts.
The consignor is liable to prove loss or damage to goods loaded at their siding without railway supervision under relevant statutory provisions.
Railway administration can be held liable for damages in transit even under owner’s risk terms if negligence is proven, particularly regarding perishable goods.
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.
An endorsee of a railway receipt, by virtue of the endorsement alone, is not entitled to maintain a suit for the loss against the railway.
Point of Law : Tribunal came to a finding that Respondent has not proved that there was shortage at time of loading and in view of non-filing of any of documents and evidence to prove that transhipme....
The railway administration is liable for damages unless proven otherwise, even when consigned goods display inherent defects during transit.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.