UNION OF INDIA Vs. B L N SITARAMIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs Bled this suit against the Union of India, represented by General managers of B. B. and C. I. , G. I. P. and Southern railways for recovery of Rs. 1453-13-6 as compensation for the damage done to six bales of cotton cloth consigned by the Surat Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. , to the plaintiffs. The Surat Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. , consigned six bales of cotton cloth on 25-8-50 to the plaintiffs. When the bales reached. Madras they were found wet and thereupon deliver was taken on 21-9-1950 In the presence of fairway Inspector who made an endorsement to the effect that all the six bales were found damaged by water on all sides Water had penetrated far into the bales and wettage could be felt on the gunny covering. Packing was gunny covering with brown paper packing inside. The plaintiffs took delivery on 21-9-1950 in the expectation that the compensation of Rs. 1453-13-6 which was fixed as damages to the goods would be paid by The railway authorities. There was correspondence between the plaintiffs and the railway company and by a letter dated 26-12-1950 the railway company rejected the claim for compensation on the ground that the bales were not packed with water proof material and there was no misconduct on the part of the railway servant. The plaintiffs filed the suit on 19-12-1951.

(2.) THE trial court came to the conclusion that the packing by the mills was as per the rules of the railway and that the plaintiffs are entitled to relief it also found that the railway was guilty of recklessness and carelessness in performance of its duty. The trial court held that the suit was within time under Arts. 30 and 31 because the plaintiffs were entitled to the benefit of the period during which time the matter was in correspondence with the railway company.

(3.) ON appeal, the Additional Judge, City Civil Court, confirmed the finding of the trial court that the bales were in sound condition and the damage was caused owing to the carelessness and misconduct on the part of the railway servants. Against the decision of the Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Madras, the railway company has preferred this appeal.