Division Circuit Bench at Guwahati)

Shri Deepak Nath Tiwari, Hon’ble M.J, R.C.T. Gorakhpur Bench at RCT Circuit Bench Guwahati Smt. Leena Sarma Hon’ble M.T, R.C.T. Guwahati Bench Claim Application No.OAI-17/2015 (OAI/GHY/2015/0017)

Date of filing of claim application: 02.02.2015 Date of Judgment: 11.02.2026 In the matter of, M/s Lunia Marketing Pvt. Limited, Near Cherra Bus Stand, Bora Bazar Shillong-793002, Meghalaya .…. Applicant - Versus –

The Union of India, Represented by its, General Manager, N. F. Railway, Maligaon, Ghy-781011 …..Respondent.

Present:

Mr. K. P. Maheswari, Learned Counsel for the Applicant.

Mr. L.Singh, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent.

Mrs. Leena Sarma, Member (Technical):

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The Claims pertain to short receipt of rice consignment which was booked from AKVD to Silchar on 02.12.2012. Total shortages for which claim has been filed is for 40 bags of rice. The value of claim as worked out by the Applicant is Rs. 25,710/- based on beejuck rate with proportionate freight. 4880 Bags of rice booked under two invoices 38/212001209 & 392/212001210. The consignment was loaded in two wagons, BCN 53134 & BCN 105924.

APPLICANT’S POINTS:

1. The Applicant alleged in the case criminal intereference enroute since wagons were found in seal-defective condition though the consignments were claimed to be booked in sound, strong and good condition with compliance of packing conditions.

2. Delay in transit has been raised as another factor which caused this shortage which has been termed as misconduct and negligence on the part of the Railways. Rough and negligent handling of the consignment along with defective condition of the wagons has been cited as another reason. The applicant demands that the Railway administration must show how the consignment was dealt during transit by producing seals, card labels and other records.

3. The subject consignment was handled in Lumding Transhipment point where no representative of the applicant was present.

4. The Applicant through his counsel pointed out by an application on 12/08/2024 that a clubbed case been allowed by this Tribunal on 30/11/2023 in OA I-28/2015. Therefore. As per the judgement and order Dated 08/01/2010 in MFA 14/2009 will be applicable in this case. The relevant part has been quoted by the Applicant, ‘……Since the condition under which the goods were booked under the aforesaid invoices were same, there is no reasonable ground for depriving the respondent from payment of the damage in respect of invoices no 1, 2 and 4 when the railway themselves have paid the said amount to the respondent in respect of invoice no.

3…..’

5. In the written arguments filed by the applicant before the Tribunal 09.02.2026 pointed out that Railways issued short certificate no 128/43.

6. Discovery prayer was filed by the Applicant on 18.01.2024 and it was allowed by the Tribunal vide order dated 18.01.2024 for Forwarding Note, Loading Tally, Unloading Tally, Seal-Card Labels at transhipment point as well as that of destination. Adverse inference is to be drawn in these cases.

RESPONDENT’S POINTS:

1. Railway Receipts, Transhipment Report and Delivery Report submitted in both the cases.

2. The Claim Applications have been filed by one Mr. Manoj Kumar Lunia as Director without any supporting document.

3. The consignment was booked under ‘Said to Contain’ with ‘Sender weight accepted’. The consignment arrived destination in SRI condition and delivered under Clear Receipt.

4. The Written Statement filed by the Railways on 05.04.2021 quoted Judgement of Hon’ble Guwahati High Court in MFA No 272/2010 delivered on 21.03.2018, ‘…..There is no record of the actual weight of sugar per bag. In this case, from the material available on record it does not appear that any prayer for open delivery was made……it is held that such a loss falls within the exception as provided under Sub Section (g) and (h) of the Section 93 of the Railways Act.’

5. The learned counsel for the Railways raised the issue of entrustment in t