The Railway Claims Tribunal had territorial jurisdiction, and the Railways' failure to follow procedures for protecting the consignment from damage justified the award of compensation to the respondent.

JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal, under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, is against the award dated 30.05.1997 made by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Jaipur Bench in OA-I-No.204/1995 whereby the learned Tribunal allowed compensation of Rs.9,45,630.55 along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of application in favour of sole respondent Aggarwals and Aggarwals.

The sole respondent had preferred claim of Rs.10,58,931/-for damage caused to the cotton bales of the claimant booked with the Railways for carrying the same from Sri Ganganagar to Salem Railway Station at “Railway’s Risk Rate”.

2. The case and claim of the respondent is that two consignments consisting of 110 cotton bales J-34 Sawgin, were booked by the respondent-Company with the Railway Administration vide Railway Receipts No.997232 and 997233, both dated 07.02.1995 from Sri Ganganager (Northern Railway to Salem) (Southern Railway). The consignment was billed in favour of Sri Rajendra Mills Limited, Salem. The value of the two consignments was Rs.6,11,072.98 and Rs.5,98,355.88, respectively, total amounting to Rs.11,09,428.86. The expected time for reaching the destination was 20 days, however, the consignment did not reach at the destination uptill 25.03.1995 as representative of the respondent was regularly making inquires at Salem Junction. The representative of the respondent, on inquiry, was informed by the Railway Authorities that since consignments are booked at Railway’s Risk Rate, the respondent would be informed soon on the arrival of the consignment.

On 26.03.1995, the respondent was informed by M/s Rajendra Mills Limited, Salem that the goods dispatched by the respondent have been burnt by fire. On 27.03.1995, the respondent sent a letter to the Chief Goods Clerk, Salem Junction to arrange for settlement of the claim fully. The respondent further sent a telegram to the Chief Claims Officer, Madras and Chief Goods Clerk to settle the claim fully. The respondent stated that the Railway Authorities mala-fidely concealed the fact about the destruction of the cotton bales by fire for considerable time though the Railways had already set up an inquiry committee to examine the lapses which had caused the fire and damage to the goods. On being demanded by the Railway Authorities, the respondent deposited freight, demurrage and wharfage charges amounting to Rs.44,101/-as the goods would be delivered on deposit of the aforesaid amount. The respondent deposited the said charges on 10.04.1995 and on 19.04.1995 and only thereafter the Railway informed that the goods have been damaged by fire. A Joint Survey Report disclosed that 80% of the cotton bales were damaged due to fire, on 26.03.1995. The Chief Claims Officer vide his letter dated 15.06.1995 rejected the claim of settlement put forward by the respondent stating therein that the goods had already arrived on 09.03.1995 and after seven days from the termination of transit period, the Railway Administration is not liable to make any compensation for the damages.

3. Mr. Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the appellants contends that Railway Claims Tribunal, Jaipur Bench had no jurisdiction to entertain the claim petition of the respondent in view of the specific provisions under Rule 9 of the Railway Claims Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 1989 (hereinafter to be referred as the “Rules of 1989”) as to the benches having territorial jurisdiction. The said provision is being reproduced below :-

“9. Place of filing application for compensation for loss, damage, destruction, deterioration or non-delivery of goods or animals.- An application for compensation referred to in sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Act may be filed before the Bench having territorial jurisdiction over the place where-

(a) the goods or animals were delivered for carriage; or

(b) where the destination station lies; or

(c) the loss, destruction, damage or deterioration of goods or animals occurred.”

Learned coun