Short Note : 1. A wagon load of groundnut oil was dispatched from Ingur to Rajnand Gaom at railway risk rate. A good deal of oil had leaked out. The value of the oil lost to the plaintiff was Rs. 10,632.18 nps. The plaintiff sued the Railways for the same plus proportionate railways freight and other incidental charges. The trial Judge found the Railway Administration guilty of negligence and misconduct, hut was also of the view that the consignor was equally at fault in using old and rusted tins which could give way during transit. He, therefore, decreed the plaintiff's claim for half the damages. 2. Held; The trial Court rightly pointed out that there was no defect in so far as the manner of packing was concerned. The only defect was that the containers were old and used onse. But should they have necessarily given way in transit was the question? It they gave way by joints bursting, was it due to mishandling of the wagon at the marshalling stations ? The trial Court found that the wagon was not softly handled at the marshalling stations. While the consignment was in transit, a message was received by the Station Master Dongargarh that the wagon should be dispatched without delay. Why should this message have been given by the controller, Nagpur raised a suspicion. The Court called upon the Railway Administration to produce for inspection the records maintained at the marshalling stations. Those records were not produced and the Court, there fort', drew a adverse inference against the Railway Administration. It was legitimate to presume that the notices were adverse. The wagon was mis-handled at the marshalling station Ajni. The leakage was noticed at Ajni itself. 3. The Court also gave repeated adjournments to the Railway Administration to produce those documents. They, this Court has reasons to believe, have been intentionally kept back. The result was inevitable. An adverse inference tender section 114 (g) had to be drawn. It was the duty of the Railway Administration to place before the Court all records showing how the consignment was dealt with during transit. Suppression of the record was obviously due to some unfavourable and inconvenient noting. Appeal dismissed.