- (1.) This Rule raises a question of interpretation of Section 80 and Section 74E of the Indian Railways Act, On this question the courts below have differed and, ultimately, the Plaintiff's suit has been dismissed. The unsuccessful Plaintiff has obtained the present Rule.
(2.) The Plaintiff company as the endorsee of the relevant railway receipt for valuable consideration claimed from the East Indian Railway seven bales of, powerloom cloth and obtained delivery of five bales but failed to obtain delivery of the remaining two. The bales had been consigned from Bombay by the consignor Messrs. Vithalji and Co. Ltd., to self as consignee but subsequently the Railway receipt was duly endorsed in favour of the Plaintiff company Messrs. Syam Sundar Jugal Kishore and Co. and ownership, of the goods was transferred on payment and receipt of price. The usual short certificate was issued by the Railway authorities and, hereafter, having failed to get any redress from the Railway administration the Plaintiff, served, the statutory notice under Section 77 of the Indian Railways. Act. and Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure and, eventually, brought the present suit for recovery of the loss which was assessed in the plaint at Rs. 2,000 (Rupees two thousand).
(3.) The consignment in the case was booked with the Great Indian Peninsular Railway, Bombay, and it had to pass through the Bengal Nagpur Railway before reaching the East Indian Railway administration. The suit, however, was brought only against the Union of India representing the East Indian Railway and the statutory notices under Section 77 of the Railways Act and Section 80, Code of Civil Procedure also appear to have been served only on this Railway administration.;