GUJARAT ANDHRA ROAD CARRIERS TRANSPORT CONTRACTORS Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
LAWS(APH)-2006-7-108
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on July 05,2006

GUJRATH ANDHRA ROAD CARRIERS TRANSPORT CONTRACTORS Appellant
VERSUS
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) M/s. Takur Sadekar and Company Limited, Nizamabad, (for short the 'consignor') consigned 454 bags of Beedies through the 1st appellant, M/s. Gujrath Andhra Road Carriers Transport Contractors, (for short "the appellant") for delivery at Sunderao (Rajasthan), on 30-7-1980. The appellant accepted the consignment and issued LRGARC.No. 87, dated 30-7-1980. The consignor insured the goods with the respondent herein. On 4-8-1980, the goods reached the destination, through a truck belonging to the appellant. 17 bags of the consignment were said to have been damaged, due to rain. The consignor made a claim with the respondent. An exercise of assessment for the damage was undertaken, and a sum of Rs. 8,608.13 ps. was paid by the respondent, to the consignor.
(2.) On the basis of a letter of subrogation and power of attorney, issued to it, by the consignor, the respondent filed O.S. No. 253 of 1983 in the Court of Principal District Munsif, Nizamabad, against the appellant and its driver, for recovery of a sum of Rs.8,694=13 ps. together with 12% interest per annum. It was pleaded that the damage to the goods occurred. on account of the negligence on the part of the appellant and that it is liable to pay the value of the damaged goods.
(3.) The driver of the vehicle remained ex parte. The suit was contested by the appellant alone. The entrustment of the goods by the consignor, to the appellant, for transporting the same to Rajasthan, was admitted. It was pleaded that all possible precautions were taken, to protect the goods, and that there was no negligence on the part of the appellant. It was also alleged that the appellant never acknowledged its liability for the damage of the goods. The appellant pleaded its ignorance, as to the terms and conditions of the contract of insurance between the consignor and the respondent, and ultimately it was urged that the suit is not maintainable at the instance of the respondent. Non-compliance with Section 10 of the Carriers Act (for short 'the Act') was also complained of.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.