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

1990 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 19

KERALA HIGH COURT
Shamsuddin, J.
Jacob And Sons v. Shipping Corporation of India
A. S. No. 315 of 1981



Liability for damages from stevedoring operations is extinguished after one year under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, regardless of acknowledgment of liability.

Headnote:(A) Carriage of Goods by Sea Act - Article 3(6) - Liability of carrier for loss or damage - Appellants challenged liability based on expiration of limitation; court clarified that non-fulfillment of time limits results in discharge of liability - No independent contract confirmed liability. (Paras 3, 4, 10, 11)

(B) Evidence - Burden of proof and negligence - Court assessed quality of evidence regarding the cause of the accident; emphasized need for consistent factual basis for finding negligence in stevedoring operations. (Paras 11, 12)

Facts of the case:
Plaintiff brought suit for damages from goods lost during stevedoring after alleged negligence by the defendant in using inadequate lifting equipment; significant cargo lost due to operational mishap.

Findings of Court:
Suit initially held valid by lower court, but findings on the discharge of liability led to appeal for dismissal.

Issues: The main issue was whether liability had been extinguished due to late filing based on the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act’s stipulations.

Ratio Decidendi: Court ruled that liability concern hinges solely on strict adherence to statutory limitation periods; acknowledgment of liability not available post-extinguishment.

Result: Appeal allowed and suit dismissed.

1Defendant is the appellant. Suit was for damages and short delivery of goods.

2 Plaintiff is a Shipping Company engaged in the carriage of goods by sea. In its vessel S. S. Vishwa Raksha, it brought among other cargo, a consignment of steel sheets to the Port of Cochin for the Cochin Refineries Ltd. The vessel arrived at Cochin on 11-10-1967. The defendant was engaged as stevedores for discharge of the said cargo. Discharge operation was completed on 18-10-1967. There were 217 bundles of steel sheets for discharge. The mode of discharge was that each bundle would be tied to a wire sling, lifted from the hatch and discharged to the lighter moored by the side of the ship. For the above purpose, the wire sling with a circumference of 13/4" was used. In the course of discharge of the last bundle to the lighter the sling broke and the bundle fell into the lighter. As a result of the impact, the bottom of the lighter gave way and 22 bundles of steel sheets were irrecoverably lost under water. The salvage operation conducted by Port Authorities did not succeed.

3 The plaintiff alleged that the cargo was lost due to the negligence of the defendant in that it used wire sling of the circumference of 13/4" instead of 2 1/2 inches for lifting the cargo, and that therefore the defendant was liable to make good the loss. The plaintiff had to pay to the consignee for short delivery of the goods occasioned which was estimated at Rs. 54,185,31, but the plaintiff limited its claim to Rs. 24,000/- for which the plaintiff settled the claim with the under writers on 25-6-1970. The suit was for recovery of this amount, besides Rs. 209.67 paid by the plaintiff to the Cochin Port Trust as charges for salvage operations.

4 The defendant filed written statement contending that they were not liable to compensate the plaintiff as the payment was made to the plaintiff long after liability was extinguished by operation of law. They also denied the averment that the defendant and their employees were negligent in discharging the cargo. According to them, they used proper and sound wire slings and other equipments for the purpose of discharging the cargo and while the bundle of sheets were being lifted and brought out of the vessel and lowered by means of wire sling of circumference of 13/4" it was suddenly noticed that the lighter which was waiting to receive the bundle was unexpectedly shifted by the lighterman and its crew. This shifting of the lighter could not have been foreseen by the defendants. As the sling with the bundle already came out of the vessel and was being lowered into the lighter the men handling the sling were compelled to keep the load suspended in air until the lighter was again safely placed in position for receiving the load. While so the sling suddenly twisted and as a result of that, the bundle fell into the boat. The averment that the liability of the plaintiff was kept alive by acknowledgement was also denied. They were not aware of the payment of Rs. 209.67 to the Cochin Port Trust by the plaintiff and the suit was liable to be dismissed.

5 Plaintiff filed a replication reiterating its contentions in the plaint.

6 The Trial Court held that the suit was not barred by limitation or extinguishment. According to the lower Court what was to be considered was the question whether the defendant was answerable to the plaintiff to the loss caused to the cargo and that liability would subsist for a period of 3 years. It also held that the rights and liabilities of the plaintiff and defendants were governed by the terms contained in Ext. A30 as regards stevedoring operation agreed to be carried on by the defendant and the provisions of the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act had no application and that the suit filed within 3 years was well within the period of limitation. Accordingly, the lower Court passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff f or recovery of a sum of Rs. 24,000/- by way of damages, and an amount of Rs. 209.67 towards the amount whi


























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 Back to top