ROBIN PHUKAN
Kundanmal Chaudhary – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN , J.
Heard Ms. M. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant and also Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned CGC, appearing for the respondents.
2. This appeal, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is directed against the common judgment and order dated 21.07.2023, passed in Original Application No.OAIII-148/2013 by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and order dated 21.07.2023, the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, has repudiated the claim of the appellant to direct the respondents to return a sum of Rs.8,34,363/- along with interest @12% per annum from the date of payment of overcharges and also other cost.
3. The background facts leading to filing of the present appeal, is briefly stated as under:-
The burden of proof lies with the claimant to substantiate claims regarding freight charges and the route taken for transportation.
Station to station rates cannot exceed freight for the shortest route; failure to comply with prior court orders is judicially unsustainable.
The court emphasized strict adherence to statutory provisions and the necessity of relying on current circulars, ruling that the applicant was not entitled to the claimed freight concession.
Compliance with notice requirements under Section 106 of the Railways Act is mandatory for claim validity; failure to comply renders claims invalid.
Failure to comply with the notice requirement under Section 106 of the Railways Act renders a claim invalid, requiring strict adherence to legal procedures for claiming refunds.
The Railway Claims Tribunal has jurisdiction over claims where freight is paid, and terminal charges cannot be collected for consignments delivered to private sidings.
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 distinction between 'overcharge' and 'illegal charge' is crucial; an overcharge is excess payment due to a mistake, while an illegal charge is impermissible by law.
Railway claims require proper authorization and notice to appropriate authorities under applicable law; failure to adhere results in claim invalidity.
Notice under Section 106 was issued to the General Manager within the stipulated period of six months and as such there cannot be any violation of rule and the delay is inconsequential.
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.