- (1.)THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 2-11-1991 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal in Claim Case No. 117/oa/-l/rc T/ngp/91, whereby the Tribunal allowed the application claiming damages but refused to grant interest of Rs. 43,868/- calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from 13-3-1988 to 26-2-1991.
(2.)BRIEF facts are required to be stated as under: the appellant - The Maharashtra State Electricity Board through Assistant controller has filed an application under section 16 of the Railway Claims tribunal Act, 1987 claiming damages of Rs. 82,366. 61 with per litem interest of rs. 43. 868. 00 at 18% per annum from 13-3-1988 to 26-2-1991 along with notice charges etc. It is contended that the claim arose out of non - delivery of 21. 150 kilo liters of L. S. H. S. oil loaded in tank wagon E. R 32642 out of consignment of 5 tank wagons all booked Ex-Bagwa to KTPS siding Chandrapur by consignor indian Oil Corporation Limited under Railway Receipt 727494 dated 12-3-1988 for delivery to Chief Engineer, T. P. S. siding at Chandrapur. It is contended that the applicant had booked the oil loaded in five tank wagons and due to non delivery of contents of tank wagon ER 32649, the applicant has suffered loss and, therefore, made the claim to the Chief Commercial Superintendent vide letter dated 28-4-1989. The claim was not settled by the respondent/railway administration and, therefore, the applicant filed claim application before the Railway Claims Tribunal on the ground that the nondelivery was on account of negligence and misconduct on the part of the railway servants. The railway administration in defence contended that the coptents of tank wagon ERTK 32642 were transhipped into tank wagon ERTK 32642 at bhusaval on 23-4-1988 and thereafter the contents were decanted by the representatives of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Vasai Road and the latter was requested by the railway administration to adjust the matter with the consignee and assured the railway administration that on receipt of original railway receipt and the certificate of non-delivery, credit would be given to the consignee to the extent of 15000 litres and as the claim was settled nothing was due to the applicant. On these pleadings the Tribunal had framed the issues and thereafter on considering the evidence adduced by the parties granted decree for damages to the extent of Rs. 71,623. 16 on account of non-delivery of L. S. H. S. oil. However, the Tribunal refused to grant interest at the rate of 18% from 13-3-1988 to 26-2-1991 amounting to Rs. 43,868/ -. Being dissatisfied with this judgment of the tribunal, the appellant has filed this appeal challenging the finding of non-grant of interest.
(3.)MR. H. D. Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the tribunal has committed an error in making the observation that the postal acknowledgment of notice Ex. A6 dated 20-10-1989 has not been produced and on this basis drew the conclusion that there was no demand for the claim of interest. He pointed out that in the notice dated 20-10-1989 the relief claimed was recovery of Rs. 82,366. 60 with interest at the rate of 18% per annum and notice charges of Rs. 140/ -. He pointed out that in the written statement it has been specifically stated by the railway administration that the receipt of notice under section 80 of Code of Civil Procedure is not disputed. He further contended that in such circumstances the Tribunal was not justified in making the observation that there was no demand for interest as is required under section 3 (i) (b) of the interest Act, 1978 (for short the Act ). Mr. Dubey further contended that the impugned judgment is not sustainable in law and the appellant is entitled to receive interest of Rs. 43,868/- at the rate of 18% from 13-3-1988 to 26-2-1991, which has been claimed by way of damages. He contended that the appellant is entitled to claim interest in view of the provisions of section 34 of the Civil procedure Code. In support of these submissions, he relied on the decision of supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. The Steel Stock Holders syndicate, Poona, AIR 1976 SC 879 and also on the decision of the Karnataka high Court in the case of Union of India vs. Visveswaraya Iron and Steel Ltd. , air 1987 Kar. 161.