1979 Supreme(MP) 256

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
R.K. Vijayvargiya, J.
Mohammad Bhai - Appellant
Vs.
Union of India - Respondent
S. A. No. 62 of 1969 (I)
Decided On : 08-03-1979

Headnote:Contract Act, 1872 – S. 180 and 181 – consignment including goods belonging to plaintiff and other person – consignment lost in way – plaintiff being bailee of the other person – suit against railways to recover damages by plaintiff maintainable.

        Short Note

       1. The plaintiff went to Nagpur and purchased some goods for himself and some for Mohammad Ali Bhaiji Bhai. The goods worth Rs. 946.25 P. purchased for Mohammad Bhaiji Bhai were also included in the consignment which was lost. There is no dispute that the consignee of this consignment was the plaintiff. The goods were to be delivered to the plaintiff. On receipt of the goods the plaintiff was under a legal liability to deliver the goods belonging to Mohammad Ali Bhaiji Bhai to them. If the goods were lost in transit and the defendant is liable for the loss the plaintiff certainly is entitled to recover damages for loss of these goods from the defendant. After recovery of the damages the plaintiff is liable to pay the same to Mohammad Ali Bhaiji Bhai. The defendant cannot contend that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover damages for loss of the said goods because they belonged to some one else. It is a matter interse between the plaintiff and Mohammad Ali Bhaiji Bhai. The plaintiff's position in respect of the goods belonging to Mohammad Ali Bhaiji Bhai was that of Bailee. Section 180 of the Indian Contract Act provides that if a third person wrongfully deprives the bailee of the use or possession of the goods bailed, or does them any injury, the bailee is entitled to use such remedies as the owner might have used in the like case if no bailment had been made, and either the bailor or bailee may bring a suit against a third person for such deprivation of property. Section 181 of the said Act provides that whatever is obtained by way of relief or compensation in any such suit shall, as between the bailor and the bailee, be dealt with according to their respective interests. In the present case, therefore, under section 180 of the said Act the plaintiff had a right to bring the suit against the Railway Administration for compensation for loss of goods belonging to Mohammad Ali Bhaiji Bhai of which the plaintiff was the bailee and the damages so recovered, as between the plaintiff and Mohammad Ali Bhaiji Bhai, shall be dealt according to their respective interests. Union of India v. Ishwaranand Saraswat, AIR 1966 SC 395 distinguished. Appeal allowed.