Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.19 seconds)The Indian Contract Act, 1872
Section 151 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Rani Kraya Vikraya Sahakari Samiti Ltd. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 3 December, 1996
In the instant case, the Railway has also failed to explain as to how they dealt with the goods in their charge not only during transit but also for the subsequent period of 7 days. There is nothing on the record to show that before re-booking the consignment on the indemnity bond furnished by a person impersonating himself to be a partner of the appellant-firm, Railway has complied with and followed the procedure and the provisions of Sub-rule (7) of Rule 144 of the Indian Railways Conference Association Coaching Tariff. In this view of the matter, the claim of Railway respondents for exemption under Sub-section (2) of Section 77 of the Indian Railways Act cannot be sustained and the loss occurred to the appellant has to be made good by the Railways. The appellant is also entitled for interest in view of the judgment of this Court passed in Rani Kraya Vikraya Sahakari Samiti Ltd. v. Union of India (AIR 1997 Raj 208) (supra). From the evidence, it is crystal clear that the damage occurred to the appellant was on account of non-delivery of the consignment and the appellant has claimed real value of the consignment as also the interest on account of non-delivery of the consignment. In my considered opinion, it was the appellant who has been deprived of the consignment on account of wrong delivery of the consignment made by the Railways within the period of 7 days from the termination of the transit and, therefore, the appellant firm is entitled for the damages as claimed by the firm along with interest.
Section 23 in The Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 [Entire Act]
Jesraj Subhachand vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 3 July, 1978
In Jesraj Subhachand v. Union of India, AIR 1978 Cal 536, the Calcutta High Court held that the defendant had to establish that goods under the Railway Receipt were lost after 30 days of termination of their transit before the defendant could claim exemption under Sub-section (2) of Section 77. The period of 30 days has been reduced to 7 days by the Indian Railway Amendment Act, 1972 w.e.f. 22-12-1972.
Section 152 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987
St. Joseph Textiles vs Union Of India And Another on 17 December, 1992
15. Hon'ble Supreme Court in St. Joseph Textiles v. Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 1692, held that Sub-section (1) of Section 77 of the Act states that the Railway Administration shall be responsible as a bailee under Sections 151. 152 and 161 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of the goods carried by Railways if such loss etc. has occurred within a period of 7 days after the termination of transit of goods. According to this provision, therefore, to entitle a claimant to make claim the liability on account of loss etc. should have arisen within the specified period of seven days after the transit is terminated.