Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1986 DIGILAW 651 (SC)

Union Of India v. Hafiz Bashir Ahmed

1986-12-10

G.L.OZA, K.N.SINGH

body1986
ORDER This appeal arises out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1788 of 1973 granted by this Court. A short question raised in this appeal is as to whether the appellant i.e. the Railway Administration was responsible for the loss of goods booked from Bhadohi Station by respondent 1 for delivery of goods to K. P. Docks, under the management of the Port Commissioner for the Port of Calcutta. Goods were booked by Railway Receipt No. 360172 in the name of consignor himself and papers were endorsed to an agent. The facts found by the courts below are that the goods reached at K. P. Docks, Railway Station on February 16, 1951. The delivery was not given to the consignors agent. It appears that the goods were not kept at the god own of the railway but at jetty at the Port of Calcutta where on February 17, 1951 on account of fire, the goods were destroyed. The High Court came to the conclusion that as the goods were entrusted to the Railway Authorities for transport, the Railway Authorities were expected to deliver the goods to the consignors agent in whose favour Railway Receipt No. 360172 was endorsed. If they had kept the goods at the jetty at the Port of Calcutta, it is their responsibility and in this view of the matter the decree passed against the appellant was affirmed by the High Court. Originally the suit was filed against the appellant, the Railway Administration and also the Port Administration but the trial court itself dismissed the suit, so far as the Port Administration is concerned against which no appeal was preferred by the plaintiff. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the opinion that the view taken by the High Court could not be said to be erroneous. We see no reason to interfere in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. In the circumstances of the case the parties are directed to bear their own costs. For Citation : 1987 (Supp) SCC 174.