SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1964 Supreme(Ori) 35

S.BARMAN
UNION OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
CUTTACK CYCLE SUPPLY AND CO. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.K.PAL, BIJOY PAL, S.C.SEN

S. BARMAN, J.

( 1 ) DEFENDANT No. 1 Union of India as owner of South Eastern Railway is the appellant. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the plaintiff against the Railway and also against the consignor defendant 2, Calcutta Cycle Supply Co. of certain goods from Calcutta for a decree for Rs. 2198. 10 np. for alleged short delivery. The plaintiffs case is that on April 12, 1953 seven cases of Cycta parts were booked from Shalimar for delivery at Cuttack. The Railway receipt Ext A described the goods as: "seven cases said to contain cycle parts. " when the goods were unloaded, one out of the seven cases was found broken; the remaining six were sound cases intact with no defect. It was discovered at the time of unloading that the broken case contained cycle parts and there was practically no shortage. In the sound cases, some foreign materials like bricks intermingled with cycle parts were found. This will appear from the unloading register Ext B. The plaintiff filed the suit on the ground of alleged short delivery. In defence the railway repudiated the plaintiff's claim stating that there was no shortage in the broken case and the alleged shortage was in respect











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top