Bombay High Court
B.B. And C.I. Railway vs Sakarchand Kalidas Shah on 29 March, 1922
Equivalent citations: (1922)24BOMLR787, AIR 1922 BOMBAY 256(1)
JUDGMENT Norman Macleod, C.J.
1. The plaintiff sued to recover for the loss of a consignment of molasses. The Judge seems to have found as a fact that there had not been a theft in the running train. Therefore the Company could not escape the liability. But unfortunately the learned Judge went on to make some remarks which were not necessary for the purpose of deciding the case, and if those remarks were to stand, they might be followed in similar cases by the Subordinate Courts, and, therefore, it is necessary, to remark that if there is a theft in a running train, then the Company are protected by the Risk Note. It is open to the plaintiff in such a case to prove that theft did not occur in the running train, or that the theft was brought about by the company's servants. But if nothing more can be proved except that there was a theft in a running train, then the Company by the Risk Note, Form B, which is now before us, are protected. Rule discharged with costs.