Law: Contract Act (IX of 1872)

Section: Ss. 151 8c 15

  Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss. 151 8c 152-----Common carriers by sea or by air-Not governed by provisions of sections 151 & 152 but by principles of English Common law-. Carriers entitled to diminish or exclude their liability by special contract-Carriers in such case, however, must give reasonable notice of special contract to passengers or owners of goods-Burden of proving that passengers or owners of goods assented to special terms lies on carriers.   Mackillican v. The Compagnie Des Messageries Marttmes De France I L R 6 Cal. 227 ; Irrawaddy Flotilla Company Limited v. Bugwandass 18 I A 121 ; Kariadan Kumber v. The British India Steam Navigation Company Limited I L R 38 Mad. 941 ; Bombay Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. v. Vasudev Baburao Kamat A I R 1928 13om. 5 ; Haji Shakoor-Gany Firm v. Firm of Volkart Brothers and another A I R 1931 Sind 124 ; British India Steam Navigation Co. v, T. P. Sokalal Ram Sait A I R 1953 Mad. 3 ; Alfred William Ludditt and others v. Ginger Coote Airways Ltd. P L D 1947 P C 55 , Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada v. Arthur -Robinson 1915 A C 740 ; Hood v. Anchor Line (Handerson Brothers), Limited 1918 A C 837 and Richardson, Spence & Co. and the "Lord Gough" Steamship Company, Limited v. Minnie Rowntree 1894 A C 217 ref.   Carriage by Air Act (XX of 1924), Ch. III--Necessity of extending rules framed under Chapter to transport by national flights as well, hinted. JUDGMENT   WAHIDUDDIN AHMED, J.-This first appeal arises out of Suit No. 19 of 1956 filed by respondent Salahuddin Ahmed for the recovery of damages in the sum of Rs. 15,000, estimated as the lass of his baggage etc. delivered to the appellants during his air travel from Dacca to Karachi on the 27th of May 1956 on the plane of the appellants' company, Syed Iftikhar Hussain, 1st Additional District Judge, Karachi, by judgment dated the 31st of October 1957, has tae granted respondent a decree in tile sum of Rs. 2,768-13-3 with costs and interest. The appellant, have challenged this decree in this appeal.   The facts material to the decision of this appeal are as follows:   The respondent travelled from Dacca to Karachi…