The two Second Appeals were referred to the Bench by Ramaswami, J., and the Civil Revision Petition was referred by Ramachandra Iyer J. in view of the conflict between the decisions in Kishanlal Roopchand &38; Co., v. Indian Dominionl and The Governor-General in Council v. Ajit Bhai Jayantilal2. In the former case, Mick, J., took the view that in a case where a particular consignment of goods was carried over more than one railway, each railway administration should be treated as a separate entity and a separate juristic personality, and, though all the railways concerned were owned by the Government, a separate notice under section 77 of the Indian Railways Act should be riven to each railway administration oh the pain of the plaintiff failing to recover any compensation for loss of goods. In the other case, Basheer Ahmed Sayeed, J., took the view that, in the case of loss of a consignment carried over two Government railways, notice under section 77 given to one such railway which entered into correspondence with the other railway on the subject of the loss before the expiry of the period of six months mentioned in section 77 of the Indian Railways Act was s