1. Appeal against the judgment and decree made in A.S. No. 414 of 1986, on the file of IX Addl. Judge. City Civil Court, Madras dated 21.7.1987 confirming the judgment and decree and granted in favour of the plaintiff in O.S. No. 5380 of 1980, on the file of II Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras dated 2.2.1985.

2. The twice defeated first defendant M/s. Deepak Transport Agency is the appellant in this Second Appeal.

3. Plaintiff M/s. Transformers & Switch Gears Limited, Madras filed the suit against the defendants M/s. Deepak Transport Agency and 2 others alleging that on 26.3.1977 at Madras, the first plaintiff entrusted with the defendant, who is a common carrier, a consignment of two 100 K.V.A. Transformers to be transported to Gwallior, that the consignment was intended to be delivered to the Assistant Controller of Stores, Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board, Gwallior, that the consignment was transported by the first defendant in a lorry bearing Registration No. AAT 2313, that the said lorry met with an accident on 30.3.1977 near Khandwa in Maharashtra State, as a result of which damages have been caused to the consignment and that this was confirmed and acknowledged by the first defendant to the first plaintiff by his letters dated 12.4.1977 and 15.4.1977, that the first defendant had the damaged consignment surveyed by competent independent surveyors and the consignment was again sent back to Madras for rectification and repairs, that the value of the damage caused was surveyed and valued at Rs. 19,011/- with incidental charges including the cost of transportation, insurance etc., that the first plaintiff preferred a claim to the first defendant claiming the damages under The Carriers Act, but the first defendant has not paid the amount and raised frivolous pleas, that the damage caused to the consignment was due to gross negligence on the part of the first defendant and or its representative or agent that therefore the first defendant is liable to compensate the first plaintiff for the said loss, that the second plaintiff has insured the consignment against loss or damage under Policy No. 104/83/1/01041/77 and has paid the first plaintiff 75% of the damage i.e., Rs. 14,060/-, that the second plaintiff had got himself subrogated to the reliefs to which the first plaintiff is entitled and therefore, the first defendant is liable to pay the first plaintiff a sum of Rs. 19,011/- being the amount of damage assessed which includes the transport of the goods been to Madras for repairs and insurance and other expenses and thus a sum of Rs. 19,011/- is due from the first defendant to the plaintiffs which the first defendant has failed and neglected to pay inspite of demands, that the plaintiffs is therefore constrained to file the suit praying for a decree for Rs. 19,011/- with interest at 12% per annum from the date of the plaint till date of decree and thereafter at 6% per annum and also the costs.

3. The first defendant filed a written statement contesting the claim of the plaintiffs by contending as follows: —

The suit claim is speculative, vague and without necessary particulars and is lacking in merits. The suit as framed is not maintainable. This defendant denies the plaintiffs right to sue and this Court has no jurisdiction to try the suit. The first plaintiff booked with this defendant at Madras one consignment consisting of electric transformers for carriage and delivered from Madras to Gwallior under Lorry Receipt No. 013379 dated 26.3.1979 and the consignment was loaded in the lorry bearing Registration No. AAT 2313. Said lorry belongs to Manghisingh, who was operating the same through Delhi-Hyderabad. The first plaintiff is the consignor and the Assistant Controller of Stores, Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, Gwallior is the consignee and the suit consignment was transported from Madras on 26.3.1977 and delivered to the consignee on 21.4.1977. The vehicle AAT 2313 which was carrying the consign