Judgment :- 1. The plaintiffs in O.S.No.159 of 1952 of the District Court of Anjikaimal, Ernakulam, are the appellants before us. The suit was for the recovery of the value of one bale of cloth short delivered by the defendant, the Great Eastern Shipping Company Limited, Bombay. 2. The bale short delivered was one of sixty-one bales shipped by S.S. JAG GANGA from Bombay to Cochin. The bill of lading is Ext. A dated 26-7-1951. 3. The lower court has found that the short delivery alleged is true, and that the value of the missing bale is Rs. 2,514-9-6. These findings are not questioned by the respondent. 4. The lower Court, however, restricted the award to Rs. 1,331-4-0 on the basis of the provision embodied in Article IV, R.5 of the Schedule to the Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925. The relevant portion of Article IV, R.S, reads as follows: "Neither the carrier nor the ship shall in any event be or become liable for any loss or damage to or in connection with goods in an amount exceeding £100 per package or unit or the equivalent of that sum in other currency unless the nature and value of such goods have been declared by the shipper before shipment and inserted in the bill of lading." It is common ground that the nature and value of the goods have not been declared by the shipper before shipment and inserted in the bill of lading that if Article IV, R.S, stood by itself the maximum amount recoverable from the respondent will be £ 100 and that the said sum in Indian currency will amount only to Rs. 1,331-4-0, the amount awarded by the Court below. 5. 1,331-4-0, the amount awarded by the Court below. 5. The contention on behalf of the appellants is that the provision has to be interpreted in the light of Article IX of the Schedule which is in the following terms: "The monetary units mentioned in these Rules are to be taken to be gold value." As pointed out by Scrutton: "The construction of this Article is difficult, The only reference to a monetary unit in the Rules is contained in Art. IV, R.S, where reference is made to a maximum liability of '£100.' If any effect is to be given to the present Article, it would seem that '£100' must be construed as T100 gold', that is to say, the current market value [presumably at the date of breach] of the gold content of a hundred sovereigns of the weight and fineness specified under the Coinage Act 1870. In as much as Art, IV, R.5 deals with the measure of the carrier's liability and not with the mode of discharging that liability, this is probably the construction which would be adopted by the English Courts" [Charterparties and Bills of Lading, 16th Edition, Page 496]. Carver says that the construction of the Article is "very difficult", and that where it is necessary to compute the equivalent of £ 100 in a currency other than that of the United Kingdom as in the case before us - the courts of this country can give judgment only in terms of Indian currency - Article IX "clearly requires the amount of the foreign currency which would be equal in value to 100 gold sovereigns to be computed." (Carriage of Goods by Sea, 9th Edition, Page 205). 6. The controversy before us has been avoided in Canada by substituting $ 500 for £ 100 in Article IV, R.S, and making Article IX read as follows: "The monetary units mentioned in these Rules are to be taken to be lawful money of Canada." In New Zealand where the unit of currency is a pound, there was no need to alter Article IV, R.S. They altered Article IX as follows and produced the same result: "The monetary units mentioned in the Rules are to be taken to be New Zealand currency." 7. Halsbury deals with the construction of references to foreign currency and to gold generally as follows: "Where a debt is expressed in terms of a foreign currency, the reference to that currency may indicate the mode in which the debt is to be discharged or the means by which the amount of the debt is to be measured or both." [Laws of England, 3rd Edition, Vol. XXVII, Page 5]. What Article IX imports is certainly not an obligation to deliver gold or pay in gold. What it does is to import a special standard or measure of value. It is not disputed that if Article IV, R.S, and Article IX read together mean- as we think it does - that the maximum prescribed is the value in rupees of 100 gold sovereigns as a vendible commodity or their gold content, then that value will far exceed the value of the bale short delivered, namely, Rs. 2,514-9-6, and that the entire amount claimed by the appellants should be decreed. 8. Our attention was drawn to the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1847, and to AIR. 1958 Kerala 51. We are unable to see anything in the Act or the judgment which militates against the view we have taken. 2,514-9-6, and that the entire amount claimed by the appellants should be decreed. 8. Our attention was drawn to the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1847, and to AIR. 1958 Kerala 51. We are unable to see anything in the Act or the judgment which militates against the view we have taken. Article IX is very much like the gold clause in international contracts which are intended, as pointed out by Lord Maugham in (1937) 2 All England Reports at page 184 "to afford a definite standard or measure of value, and thus to protect against a depreciation of the currency and discharge of the obligations by payment of lesser value than that prescribed." There is no prohibition of such a clause in this country, as for example in Canada by the Gold Clauses Act, 1937, S.6, which provides: "Every gold clause obligation is hereby declared to be contrary to public policy and no such provision shall hereafter be contained in or made in respect of, any obligation." The definition of the expression "gold clause obligation" given in S.2 of that Act is as follows: "The expression 'gold clause obligation' in this Act means any obligation heretofore or hereafter incurred [including any such obligation which has, at the date of the commencement of this Act matured] which purports to give to the creditor a right to require payment in gold or in gold coin or in an amount of money measured thereby, and includes any such obligation of the government of Canada or of any province." 9. In the light of what is stated above the appellants are entitled to a decree for the entire value of the bale short delivered, namely, Rs. 2,514-9-6, and the appeal has to be allowed to that extent judgment accordingly. The parties will pay and receive proportionate costs here and in the court below. Interest at 6% per annum is allowed on the sum decreed from date of suit till date of decree and thereafter at the same rate on the aggregate amount till date of realisation. Allowed.