Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1962All461
..... 24,060/- in accordance with the details furnished at the foot of the plaint.10. in paragraph 7 the plaintiff alleged that the required notices under section 77 of the indian railways act and section 80 of the code of civil procedure had been duly sent to the defendant on the 8th november, 1947, and 10th september, 1948, respectively. in this ..... the breach in question.58. beg, j., relied on the decision of o. hanlan v. great western railway co., (1865) 122 er 1274 in which it was held that the measure of damages in an action against a railway company for non-delivery of certain goods was the price at which the goods could be obtained in the market, ..... at gauhati, had booked a consignment of 36 bales containing cotton piece goods from madras siding station on the m and s. m. railway to gauhati on the assam railway on the 29th october, 1947. messrs. binny and company were the consignees.the plaintiff had paid the price of the consignment to the bank representing the consignees and obtained the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1915All328; 30Ind.Cas.400
..... question of the applicability of section 75 arose. the articles which were in dispute therein were durries, which do not come within the second schedule of the act. the railway company had sought to free itself of its liability in that case by pleading a certain rule made by itself which the court held to be in conflict with ..... rs. 60. these are all articles which are mentioned in the second schedule of the railways act. the railway company pleaded that as the plaintiff had not declared these articles, it, the company, was not liable in view of the terms of section 75 of the railways act. the courts below did not accept this plea and decreed the suit in favour of ..... july 1912 as a passenger from howrah to khurja by the up umballa express train on the east indian railway. he had three parcels of luggage: two bundles and a steel trunk. these were weighed and delivered by him to the railway administration and placed in the luggage van. only two bundles were delivered at the end of his journey .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1919All50; 52Ind.Cas.644
..... east indian railway company for damage done to a consignment containing machine made lace. the consignment was of over the value of rs. 100, but the value and the contents had not been declared and no extra freight had been paid by way of compensation for increased risks.2. the railway company pleaded that under the provisions of section 75, act ix ..... government stamp valued at half-anna and a government stamp valued at rs. 1,000. in order to avoid liability under the provisions of section 75, act ix of 189c, a railway company has to establish two conditions. the first is that the articles composing the consignment are articles mentioned in the second schedule. the second is that the ..... of 1890, it was not liable.3. the contention on the other side is that the word 'lace' in the second schedule of act ix of 1890 means hand made lace and not machine made lace. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1926All698
..... amount of a certain overcharge alleged to have been paid and damages against the respondent g.i.p. railway company.2. the suit was dismissed by the lower appellate court on the sole ground that no notice, as required by section 77 of the indian railways act, was given by the plaintiffs.3. the facts involved are briefly these:4. on the 26th of ..... it refund the freight which it charged unreasonably.8. apart from this pleading of the plaintiffs, we are of opinion that the word 'loss' in section 77 of the indian railways act does include a case of non-delivery. we are aware that there is a case in this court in which a contrary view was taken. but the facts of that ..... therefore the notice was given beyond six months from this date. on the face of it, the suit was properly dismissed on the ground of section 77 of the railways act.6. in this court however it has been contended that section 77 has been wrongly interpreted. correctly interpreted it is urged it should mean that notice has to be given .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 58Ind.Cas.547
..... long beyond time. that article 31 applies to a cast of this kind appears from the ruling of this court in the case of great indian peninsular railway company v. ganpat rai 10 ind. cas. 122 : 33 a. 544 at p. 551 : 8 a.l.j. 543. the same ..... present suit is against a carrier and it is a suit for compensation for non delivery of the bundle which was consigned to the railway and was to have been delivered by it. the limitation is one year from the date on which the goods were to have ..... was not accepted. the claim is not based upon any promise to pay and cannot be regarded as such. section 25 of the contract act, to which reference was made, does not seem to me to have any bearing upon the present question. i hold that the court ..... the court below has dismissed the suit, holding that it was time-barred under article 30 or 31 of schedule i of the indian limitation act. article 30, which provides for a suit for compensation against a carrier for losing or injuring goods, seems to be inapplicable to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1923All426; 71Ind.Cas.609
..... the risk-note, as there was no loss of the goods by the company.7. in my opinion this contention must prevail; the decision of the court below is erroneous.8. section 72 of the indian railways act (ix of 1890) defines the responsibility of a railway administration for the loss, destruction or deterioration of goods delivered to it for carriage ..... : the responsibility is that of a bailee as laid down in sections 151, 152 and 161 of the indian contract act subject to any special agreement executed by the ..... to the owner in the sense of injury to him arising out of his being deprived of his goods.11. section 151 of the indian contract act, referred to in section 72 of the railways act, lays down that the bailee of goods is bound to take as much care of the goods bailed as a man of ordinary .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1920)ILR42All76
..... east indian railway company for damage done to a consignment containing machine-made lace. the consignment was of over the value of rs. 100, but the value and the contents had not been declared and no extra freight had been paid by way of compensation for increased risks.2. the railway company pleaded that under the provisions of section 75 of act no. ..... valued at half an anna and a government stamp valued at rs. 1,000. in order to avoid liability under the provisions of section 75 of act no. ix of 1890 a railway company has to establish two conditions. the first is that the articles composing the consignment are articles mentioned in the second schedule. the second is that the ..... ix of 1890, it was not liable.3. the contention on the other side is that the word ' lace ' in the second schedule to act ix of 1890 means hand-made lace and not machine-made lace .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1927All349
..... injured. on the other hand the majority of authority is to the effect that the burden of proof is on the railway company. the provision of the indian evidence act. section 106, would also lead to the same conclusion, as nobody but the railway company would be in a position to show what was the precaution taken by them. in this case the ..... railway administration did take up that burden and adduced evidence in the person of witnesses to show that the engines were fitted with ..... causes at aligarh by which the respondent's suit for damages was decreed against the secretary of state as represented by the agent of the east indian railway.2. the respondent's case is that his dhobi lived near the railway line. on the morning of the 27th of may 1925, two trains were running a race on the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1912)ILR34All422
..... first contention of the applicants is that having regard to the provisions of section 80 of the indian railways act (act ix of 1890), the claim could not be decreed against this railway unless it was proved that the goods were lost on that railway. this contention appears to be well founded. section 80 provides that a suit for compensation -- among other things--for loss of ..... the other articles contained in the parcels in which the articles first mentioned were placed. this was held by the bombay high court in pandlik udaji jadhav v. 8. m. railway company (1909) 11 bom, l.r. p. 827 and is justified by the language of the section . the plaintiff in his deposition admitted that the three parcels not delivered to him .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1970]26STC115(All)
..... favour of the assessee at firozabad and(b) the railway receipts which are the documents of title were retired by the assessee in uttar pradesh after making payment of the price of the goods to the company's bankers.12. he rests his contention on section 25 of the indian sale of goods act and places reliance on the stale of madras v. vuppala ..... pedg venkataramaniah and sons [1958] 9 s.t.c. 54 majety balakrishna rao v. mooke devassy ouseph and sons : air1959ap30 and bank of morvi ltd. v. baerlein bros. a.i.r. 1924 bom. 325 to support his contention that where the railway receipt is in .....
Tag this Judgment!