Court : Kolkata
Reported in : (1899)ILR26Cal465
..... are concerned. a railway company is not liable for the acts of even its own servants, if those acts are not done in the course and scope of the servants' duty--cobb v. great western railway co. (1894) l.r., app. cas. 419.64. c.a.v.maclean, c.j.,65. this is an appeal by the east indian railway company from a decision of ..... with their duty when they allowed gunpowder to be carried in a compartment where they allowed smoking54. section 47 of the indian railways act, 1890, empowers the company to make rules, and that power is given for the very purpose of meeting cases of this kind; but the defendants have not shown that they took ..... on their part that something dangerous was being carried.40. it was not possible for the company's servants to examine the luggage of every passenger. section 58 of the indian railways act, 1890, provides that every passenger shall, on request, deliver to the railway servants an account in writing containing such a description of the goods he is carrying as may .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1926)28BOMLR718
..... make his signature one on behalf of the plaintiff, within the meaning of section 72 of the indian railways act. jamshedji's signature was made by him as an agent who had authority to make such a signature. in aldridge v. the great western railway company (1864) 33 l.j.c.p. 161 where a carrier was employed both by the plaintiff ..... for a particular sale, so as to make the goods ' ascertained ' under section 83 of the indian contract act. here there was a definite appropriation of these bales by the plaintiff to the contract, exhibit 68, and that had been assented to by the railway company. according to the ruling of this court in ram-chandra natha v. g.i.p ..... of law, under section 72 of the indian railways act, does not really arise for decision, but, as the case may go further, i think we should give our opinion. it has been laid down by this court, following brabant & go. v. king [1895] a.c. 632, 640, that the obligation of the railway company towards the consignor of goods includes not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1921)23BOMLR1144; 66Ind.Cas.726
..... the seller and the share certificates property in the shares does not pass to the purchaser.35. section 28 of the indian companies act enacts that shares shall be transferable in manner provided by the articles of the company. article 33 of the articles of association of the central india mills provides that shares will be transferred by an ..... out of land and things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth. it is enacted by section 28 of the indian companies act that shares in a company shall be moveable property. share certificates are moveable property and are therefore goods within the meaning of section 108 of (he ..... estopped by the said act of his from asserting any right to the shares. mr,, inverarity for the plaintiff contended that there is no estoppel and has relied on france v. clarka (1884) 26 ch. d. 257. tayler v. great indian peninsula railway co. (1895) 4 g. &. j 559. hutchison v. the colorado united mining company and hamill (1886) .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 82Ind.Cas.772
..... is perfectly clear that the points for determination were brought out by the evidence on the record. the first point to be noted is this. the east indian railway company, were the carriers from howrah to agra. the plaintiff took some sort of objection originally in respect to an alleged damage done to the goods when they ..... arises was brought is 1918 in the court of the subordinate judge of agra by the proprietor of a firm carrying on business at agra against the east indian railway company on the following allegations:(1) that the plaintiff had had consigned to him 101 bales of strawboard from howrah to agra city in two waggons one containing ..... sections 227 and 237 of the indian contract act. here the station master clearly had authority to bind the company by his action. the responsibility of the railway company is thus that of a bailee under sections 151, 152 and 161 of the indian contract act. this is clear from the provisions of section 72 of the indian railways act (ix of 1890).8. it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1902)ILR25Mad635
..... council may be entitled will not be the same as in the case of the street mayor of birkenhead v. l. and n.w. railway company 15 q.b.d. 572.17. turning now to indian cases, in the chairman of the naihati municipality v. kishori lal goswami i.l.r. 13 calc. 171 it was held that the vesting ..... owner of the land forming the street in question. it becomes therefore unnecessary to consider whether, having regard to the restriction imposed on the indian legislature by the proviso to section 22 of the indian councils act, 1861 (24 and 25 vic., ch. 67), and to the authorities empowered in their executive capacity to dispose of all real and ..... the extent of property and the nature of the right, title and interest possessed by urban authorities in streets vested in them under the metropolis local management. act, 1855, the public health act, 1875, and similar enactments, were considered and settled. the leading case in which the question first presented itself for consideration in the court of appeal is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1907)ILR29All685
..... by their lordships of the privy council in norendra nath sircar v. kamalbasini dasi (1895) l.r., 23 i.a., 18 and also in robinson v. canadian pacific railway company l.r., 1892, a.c., 481, where they add that resort must be had to the pre-existing law in all instances where a code contains provisions of doubtful ..... in such cases.'49. mr. justice fulton, while admitting that is was undoubtedly a serious measure to limit the meaning of words in such a carefully drawn act as the indian penal code, and one which no court would attempt unless it were practically certain that the matter to be eliminated was not within the contemplation of the legislature, ..... i find that their lordships themselves say the question did not arise for consideration and i can find no reference in the judgment to the penal code. moreover, the indian evidence act had not, when this judgment was passed, been, consolidated. i am therefore forced to consider the question virtually as res integra and in the light of the laws .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1927Mad85; (1926)51MLJ641
..... 11 ch 449:i never knew an amendment set down or discussed upon the marginal note to a clause. the house of commons never has anything to do with the amendment of the marginal note.11. these remarks apply with great force to indian enactments. the object of the act as stated in the ..... be held to control the clear meaning of the section or to show what the section means when the section is not clear. baggallay, l.j., observed in attorney general v. great eastern railway company (1879) ..... urged by mr. suryanarayana that the marginal note should be considered in considering an act. the marginal note here is 'amendment of section 3, act iv of 1882.' whatever may be the view with regard to certain acts of parliament, in the case of indian enactments the marginal notes are never the subject of discussion and they should not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1912)23MLJ652
..... to the plaintiff: except on terms indicated by obvious considerations of justice and this view also finds support from mellor j. dictum in clough v. london and northwestern railway company (1871) l.r. 7 ex. 26. in this country there has never been any distinction between equitable and legal jurisdictions and the same court has the power ..... the principle upon which think we ought to act in this case is similar to taht embodied in several statutes of the indian legislature, for instance section 41 of the specific relief act, section 55, subsection 6, clause (b) of the transfer of property act and section 86 of the trusts act. i do not propose to consider whether we ..... taken to the reception of its contents by secondary evidence. mr. ramachandra aiyar, the learned vakil for the appellant, however contends relying upon section 49 of the registration act that the document itself could not be used in evidence at all. section 49 says : ' no document required by section 17 to be registered shall.6. (a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1920)38MLJ360
..... legislative authority has sanctioned is inconsistent with any portion of the railways act, and the learned vakil for the respondent had not satisfied me on this point. i must therefore hold that the rule is inter vires. reference may also be made to toonya ram v. east indian railway company i.l.r. (1902) cal. 257 tippanna v. the ..... question. it was contended by the learned vakil for the respondent that a railway company is not competent to limit its liability to less than the minimum care which the indian contract act imposes on bailees. it is now well settled that under the indian law, a railway company has not the liabilities of an insurer but only those of a bailee ..... . see india general steam navigation company v. bhagwan chandra pal i.l.r. (1913) cal. 716 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 55Ind.Cas.754
..... with the main question. it was contended by the learned vakil for the respondent that a railway company is not competent to limit its liability to less than the minimum care which the indian contract act imposes on bailees. it is now well settled that under the indian law, a railway company has not the liabilities of an insurer but only those of a bailee. see india ..... must be reasonable and just. there is great difference between the english law and the indian law on this subject. if i understand the position aright, a railway company in england would be authorised by parliament to make its own rules and regulations. it would be created by an act of parliament and would have full power to regulate its internal management. under these .....
Tag this Judgment!