1. Had there been an Indian Ombudsman, the technical defence raised by the Railway in this suit might well have come under his censorious attention. The plea put forward by the defendant, the Union of India represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway, Madras, in answer to a suit for damages on account of the damaged condition of certain bags of lime carried by the Railway, was, interalia, that the suit was had for want of valid notice under S.80, CPC. If I may anticipate my conclusion at this stage, the contention is not merely untenable but unjust and is calculated only to protract the litigation and to postpone the facing of a trial on the merits and, perhaps, to tire out the private party, the plaintiff, whose resources are certainly very limited. In the present case, a notice had been sent purporting to be under S.80, CPC., before the action was instituted. The advocate, who issued the notice for the plaintiff, described his client as "Kozhikode Lime Centre, Lime Fruits, Vegetable Merchants and Commission Agents, M.V. Market, Calicut-2." The same advocate later described the plaintiff in the plaint as "Kozhikode Lime Centre by pro-pritor, P.P. Abubacker". I