J.V. Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS is Plaintiff's Second Appeal whose suit was decreed to the extent of Rs. 2,500 against the Union of India and others, Defendants -Respondents, but was dismissed in appeal.
(2.) THE Plaintiff -Appellant Lai Singh filed the suit for the recovery of Rs. 8,500 as compensation on account of damages caused to him, on the allegations that he being a tenant on the land measuring 33 Bighas Kham along the Railway Line, Ludhianav -Sangrur his crop was ripe for harvesting; that on 6th May, 1970, the railway engine rashly and negligently ejected and emitted burning pieces of coal resulting in the burning of crops in the fields in possession of the Plaintiff which caused damage to him to the extent of Rs. 8,500. The suit was filed on 24th February, 1973, against the General Manager, Northern Railways, New Delhi and the Claims Superintendent, Northern Railways, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi. In the Written Statement filed on behalf of the Defendants, an objection was taken that the suit should have been filed against the Union of India as provided under Section 79 of the Code 61 Civil Procedure, and, therefore, the suit as such was not maintainable against the Defendants. On this objection, the Plaintiff moved an application, dated 6th September, 1973, purporting to be under Order 1, Rule 10 Code of Civil Procedure for impleading the Union of India as a party. It was stated in the application that permission be granted to redescribe Defendant No. 1 as "Union of India through the General Manager, Northern Railways, New Delhi." This application was allowed by the trial court, - -vide its order, dated 2nd November, 1973. Consequently, an amended plaint was filed in which the Union of India was described to be the Defendant through the General Manager, Northern Railways. On the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues: 1. Whether any wheat crop of the Plaintiff has -been burnt due to the rash and negligent act of the driver of the Defendants, as alleged? 2. To what amount on account of damages is the Plaintiff entitled? Whether the suit is within time?
(3.) WHETHER the suit is bad for non -joinder of necessary parties? 4. (a) Whether a valid notice under Section 80 Code of Civil Procedure has been served upon the Defendants? If not, its effect?;