The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of the conditions printed on the forwarding note and the consignor's agreement to be bound by these conditions in determining the liability for additional charges due to mistakes in accepting consignments at concession rates.

Leach, C.J.

1. For some time before 1st July 1941 - the exact period has not been disclosed to the Court - the South Indian Railway Company, Ltd., booked consignments of rice from stations on the companys line to Galle in Ceylon at a rate less than it had previously charged.. The new rate was known as the concession rate and was the only rate ruling in the month of June 1941. On the 15th of that month, the company cancelled the concession rate and reverted to the old rate as from 1st July 1941. The change was notified in the Local Rate Advice No. 6 of 1941, which was circulated to all stations on the companys system. In July 1941, the petitioner wished to consign two waggons of rice from Tanjore to Galle and five waggons of this commodity from Adhirampatnam to the same destination. Rice so consigned is carried over the South Indian Railway system to Dhanushkodi where it is shipped to Thalamannar and then. placed on the Ceylon Government Railway. The booking clerks at Tanjore and at Adhirampatnam accepted these consignments. Both of them forgot that the concession rate had been cancelled and consequently the consignments were accepted at the concession rate. The evidence of the station master at Adhirampatnam is to the effect that a statement of the new rates was hung up in the station premises for the information of the public. The petitioners consignment from. that station was accepted on 11th July 1941. The consignment from Tanjore was accepted on 1st July 1941. When the goods arrived at Galle the mistake had been discovered and the Ceylon Government Railway refused to deliver the goods to the consignee unless the difference between, the concession rate and the ordinary rate was. paid. The petitioner was compelled to comply with this demand, which meant the disbursement of an additional sum of Rs. 766-10-9. As he considered that the further demand was unlawful, he filed a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Trichinopoly to recover the amount. The suit was numbered S. C. S. No. 64 of 1942. The Subordinate Judge held that by reason of Clause 5 of the conditions set out on the face of the forwarding note the petitioner was. not entitled to recover and accordingly dismissed his suit. The petitioner has applied under Section 25, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, for revision of the decree passed by the Subordinate Judge. The South Indian Railway Company Ltd.,, and the Ceylon Government Railway were both made defendants in the suit and they are the respondents in this petition. They contend that the decision of the Subordinate Judge is right, but they say that in any event the petitioner was precluded from suing by reason of, Condition No. 8 printed on the back of the forwarding note.

2. Condition No. 5 on the face of the document reads as follows:

I agree that the railway company have the right of re-measurement, re-weighment, re-classification and re-calculation of rates, terminals and other charges at the place of destination, and of collecting before the goods are delivered any amount that may have been omitted or undercharged.

Obviously the demand for the additional amount was not based on re-measurement or re-weighment. The respondents claim that it is based on a re-classification and re-calculation of rates. Numerous cases have been referred to in the course of the arguments on this question but we do not consider it necessary to discuss them. In our opinion, this is clearly not a case of re-classification or of re-calculation of rates. There was only one class of rice and the arithmetic was correct. The mistake was in charging a rate which had been cancelled instead of charging the rate which had been prescribed, and the only rate which could be lawfully charged. Therefore, if the case fell to be decided on Condition No. 5 of the conditions on the face of the forwarding note, the consignors case would be well-founded; but we consider that the railways are entitled to judgment by reason of Condition No.