Back
SAURABH LAVANIA
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Through Power Of Attorney – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Thro General Manager, Northern Railway – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the appeals are consolidated for a common decision on similar issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. the factual basis for the claim is the loading conditions and absence of railway supervision. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. evidence requirements emphasize burden on the consignor to establish proper loading. (Para 12 , 13 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. the court prioritizes adherence to statutory provisions governing claims. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. the appeals are ultimately dismissed. (Para 43 , 44) |
JUDGMENT :
(Saurabh Lavania, J.)
1. As the issue involved in all these appeal(s), broadly, is similar as such with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same are being decided by this common order.
2. Heard Sri M.E. Khan alongwith Sri Shashank Mishra, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri Arun Kumar Verma as also Sri Mahendra Kumar Mishra, learned Counsel for the respondent-Railway.
3. All the appeal(s), indicated above, were filed by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (in short "BPCL"), under Section 23 of The Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (in short "Act of 1987"), challeng
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
