NIRANJAN LAL RATANKUMAR Vs. RIVER STEAM NAVIGATION CO. LTD. AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 7,357/6/6 as damages. plaintiff is a registered partnership firm carrying on business at Gauhati. The plaintiffs case is that under invoice No. 10691, S/R 83 dated 12th March 1956, 250 bags of flour were dispatched from Jagannath Ghat to Gauhati Bazar Ghat. Another consignment of 100 bags of flour by invoice No. 10705 S/R 98 was also booked on the same day from Jagannath Ghat for carriage to Guahati Bazar Ghat. The plaintiff went to take delivery of the said consignments at Gauhati Bazar Ghat and found the goods of the consignments damaged. The assessment delivery was taken. The amount of damage suffered by the plaintiff was recorded in the delivery register in the office of the Steamer Company at Gauhati Bazar Ghat. As damage was caused to the consignments due to the negligence and misconduct on the part of the servants of the Defendant Company which carry on the work of carrying goods on steamer, the plaintiff is entitled to the damages claimed. The plaintiff has claimed Rs. 5,750 as the damage of the consignment under invoice No. 10691 and the balance for the consignment booked under invoice No. 10705.

(2.) THREE money suits Nos. 10, 11 and 13 of 1957 were disposed of by the Court below by one judgment. Suit No. 10/57 was filed for sic. every of 3450 -6 -0 and related to a consignment of 200 bags of sugar under invoice No. 10704 dated 12 -3 -56. The present appeal relates to the suit No. 11/57. Suit No. 13/57 relates to a sum of Rs. 2,613 -14 -6 in respect of a consignment of Arhardal booked through the Defendants under invoice No. 10701 dated 12 -3 -56. All these consignments were booked from the same Ghat and to the same destination. We are, however, concerned in this appeal with the claim of Rs. 7,357 -6 -6 which was the subject -matter of Money Suit No. 11/57. The trial Court dismissed all the suits. Regarding the consignment under invoice No. 10705 S/R 98 the finding of the Court below is that the plaintiff has not proved the endorsement of the steamer receipt in his favour in respect of the aforesaid invoice. He has, however, dismissed the suit on the finding that the loss was caused by the act of God and the plaintiff was not entitled to any damages. The finding of the Court below is assailed in appeal both on the question of endorsement of invoice No. 10705 and on the question of fact as to whether the damage was caused on account of the act of God. So far as the suit relating to the invoice No. 10705 S/R 98 is concerned we are of opinion that the plaintiff had no right to maintain the present suit as he has not succeeded in establishing the transfer of the steamer receipt in his favour.

(3.) MR . Lahiri who appears for the Appellant, has contended that even though there was no endorsement in favour of the plaintiff, as the steamer receipt which is a document of title, was produced from the custody of the plaintiff and on the basis of which he got assessment delivery, he is entitled to sue. For this he relies upon Section 8 of the Carriers Act, 1865 (Act III of 1865) (hereinafter called 'the Act'), relevant provision whereof provides: