| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1961 SLG 1968 1961 SLD 1968 = 1961 PLD 132 |
Dacca High Court
Appeal No. 158 of 1954, decided on 27th January 1960
Presented By: Akbar and Sattar, JJ
S. R. Pal and B. N. Chowdhury for Appellant. Ahmad Sobhan for
Respondent.
Appeal No. 158 of 1954, decided on 27th January 1960
Presented By: Akbar and Sattar, JJ
S. R. Pal and B. N. Chowdhury for Appellant. Ahmad Sobhan for
Respondent.
M/s MUHAMMADI STEAMSHIP Co. LTD., KARACHI-Appellant
VERSUS
M/s. ABDUR RAHMAN-ABDUL GANI-Respondent
Law:
Section:
Bill of lading---- -----Amount realised from shipper on account of lighterage and demurrage hut shown in freight column-Neither lighter used nor any demurrage paid by shipping company-Whether mere mention of charges in freight column precludes shipper from claiming refund of amount. The plaintiff at the time of shipment paid freight for the entire cargo covered by the bill of exchange. On representation of the company that lighter may have to be used for unloading the cargo at the port of destination the plaintiff paid a certain additional sum at the rate of Rs. 20 per freight ton to meet the lighterage and, demurrage charges, if any. As the cargo carrying steamship had not to take the help of any lighter to discharge the cargo nor had any demurrage been paid, the plaintiff claimed the refund the additional amount paid to the company to which the latter answered that the amount claimed was really a part and parcel of the freight agreed upon and therefore refund of the amount cannot be claimed. The company in this connection relied on the endorsement under "Freight" in the bill of lading which was to the effect that "Rs. 20 per freight ton for lighterage" and accordingly contended that the additional charge had been shown in the bills of lading in the rate and freight column and had been included in the total freight payable which implied that it was an additional charge. Held: the amount deposited at the rate of Rs. 20 per freight ton was not part and parcel of the freight. From the mere fact that this amount was mentioned in the bill of lading, it cannot be said that it was a part and parcel of freight. If the said sum was a part of the freight, the company could have easily mentioned it as such in the bills of lading and then there would have been also no necessity for saying that this was charged for lighterage and demurrage. The Company were not entitled to charge this additional amount as freight. It would, be absurd to suggest that this additional sum would acquire legal character of freight, because it is mentioned as a second item after freight in the bills of lading. Freight is a reward payable to…