SHIV KUMAR SHARMA,J. - (1.) ALL these 14 civil misc. appeals arise from a judgment dated October 29,1991 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal' Jaipur (for short the Tribunal). These appeals have been argued together by the learned Counsel for the parties. As common questions of fact and law are involved in these appeals they are being decided together.
(2.) IN all these 14 matters the appellants have claimed the amount of compensation for short delivery of coal booked from Kusanda (BG) to NMK (MG) (in 5 matters) and ex. Kusanda (BG) to Maonda (MG) (in 9 matters). Details of each matter with regard to amount claimed and booking particulars, wagons loaded and delivered have been given in the statement enclosed with the judgment of the learned Tribunal. The coal in all these 14 matters was booked at owner's risk rate. The contention of the appellants in all these matters is that the shortage in each case was due to negligence/misconduct on the part of the Railway Administration. The Railway Administration on the other hand took the plea that there was no negligence on the part of Railway Administration. Some other legal pleas with regard to notice under Section 78 -B of the Indian Railways Act and Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure as well as limitation had been taken.
(3.) EARLIER the appellants instituted independent suits in the Court of Additional District Judge, Neem Ka Thana against the Union of India but subsequently, the learned District Judge. Seekar in view of the provisions contained in Railway Claims Tribunal Act, transferred the said cases to the learned Tribunal. Prior to transfer the learned Additional District Judge framed issues in 13 cases and in one case the learned Tribunal framed the issues almost on the lines as framed by the Additional District Judge, Neem Ka Thana.;