MADRAS HIGH COURT
Ramaprasada Rao, J.
Madurai K. Rengiah Chettiar and Co (M/s). Madurai v. Union of India
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. damage to goods was noted upon receipt. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments regarding notice and premature filing. (Para 2 , 4 , 7) |
| 3. court's reasoning on notice periods and liability. (Para 3 , 5 , 6 , 9) |
| 4. importance of knowledge of damage for limitation. (Para 8) |
| 5. final ruling on the case. (Para 10) |
1. The plaintiff is the revision petitioner. His case was that a consignment of 145 bags of gramdhal was booked from Jakhodhere to Tuticorin under invoice No. 2 dated 10-7-1962, a copy of which was marked by the plaintiff himself as Ex. A - 1. The goods arrived at Tuticorin on 3-8-1962. According to P.W. 1, the goods were emitting a bad smell and the packages were considerably damaged. Such damage to the packages was noticed by P.W. 1 even on 3-8-1962. A request was made on 5-8-1962 to the railway authorities for the assessment of the damage to the packages and on such a requisition, the packages were examined and a certificate of damage was issued on 8-8-1962, and the petitioner secured open delivery of the consignment. On the basis of the certificate of damage, he made a claim on the Chief Commercial Manager under the provisions of the Indian Railways Act on 9-9-1962. The railw
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.