PANNALAL KISHANLAL Vs. OSAKA SHOSEN KAISHA
LAWS(CAL)-1964-6-20
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on June 26,1964

PANNALAL KISHANLAL Appellant
VERSUS
OSAKA SHOSEN KAISHA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MCLEAN AND HOPE V. FLEMING [REFERRED TO]
GRAINGER AND SON V. WILLIAM LANE GOUGH [REFERRED TO]
SMITH AND CO. V. BEDOUIN STEAM NAVIGATION CO. [REFERRED TO]
COMPANIA NAVIERA VASCONZADA V. CHURCHILL AND SI [REFERRED TO]
NEW CHINESE ANTIMONY CO. LTD. V. OCEAN STEAMSHIP CO,LTD. [REFERRED TO]
F. L. SMITH AND CO. V. F. GREENWOOD [REFERRED TO]
ATT.-GEN. OF CEYLON V. SCINDIA STEAM NAVIGATION CO. LTD. [REFERRED TO]
GUARDIAN ASSURANCE CO. V. SHIVA MANGAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
TRICAMBJI V. VERJI KANJI [REFERRED TO]
PACHAIAMMAL V. HINDUSTHAW COOPERATIVE INSCE-SOCIETY LTD. [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

RACLHA KRISHNA DAGA VS. GENERAL ASSURANCE SOCIETY [LAWS(CAL)-1969-9-30] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The plaintiff filed this suit for the recovery of Rs. 8,248.50 nP. against defendant No. 1 and decree for Rs. 8,065.20 nP. against defendant No. 2. Defendant No. 1 is the shipping company. Defendant No. 2 is the insurance company. On May 15, 1957 Messrs. Gangjee Premjee & Co. of Bangkok, it is alleged, caused 215 bags of Damar Batu to be shipped on board the ship "S. S. Bangkok Maru" belonging to the shipping company. It is also alleged by the plaintiff that the terms of carriage were recorded in the Bill of Lading dated May 15, 1957. The plaintiff claims to be the endorsee of the Bill of Lading. The plaintiff claims to be the endorsee of the Bill of Lading. The plaintiff further alleges that on May 9, 1957 Messrs. Gangjee Premjee & Co. insured the goods with the insurance company. The insurance was for the sum of Rs. 12,298-0-0 from the port of Bangkok until delivery. The plaintiff relied on a certificate of insurance dated May 9, 1957.
(2.)The plaintiff alleges that the steamship arrived at the port of Calcutta in the middle of June, 1957, and started landing goods on or about June 20, 1957. The plaintiff's case is that the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs. 1397,50 nP, on account of import duty in anticipation of the delivery of goods. The plaintiff's further case is that the plaintiff received 74 bags and there was short delivery of 141 bags for which Commissioners for the Port of Calcutta issued a short certificate.
(3.)The further case of the plaintiff is that the shipping company offered to deliver certain unidentified and nil mark Damar Batu. On inspection the plaintiff found that the said Damar Batu was not the Damar Batu consigned to the plaintiff, and the same was spoilt, burnt, inferior in quality, unfit for consumption and was a portion of the goods landed as unmanifested excess in rebagged burnt pieces.


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