| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1960 SLG 341 1960 SLD 341 1960 PLD 42 |
Dacca High Court
Second Appeal No. 236 of 1954, decision dated: 04-07-1957. PRESENT:
AMIN AHMED, CHIEF, JUSTICE NANDI, JUSTICE
B. C. Das and S. C. Bose for Appellant. Syed A. B. Mahmud Hussain, Assistant Government Pleader for
Respondents.
Second Appeal No. 236 of 1954, decision dated: 04-07-1957. PRESENT:
AMIN AHMED, CHIEF, JUSTICE NANDI, JUSTICE
B. C. Das and S. C. Bose for Appellant. Syed A. B. Mahmud Hussain, Assistant Government Pleader for
Respondents.
ABDUL KARIM
VS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Railways Act (IX of 1890), S. 72 Goods carried by Railway, without consignor's consent, by longer route not stipulated in contract i.e., Risk Note A Deterioration of goods Railway not absolved from general statutory liability of bailee and liable to pay damages Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss. 151, 152 & 161. A contract for the carriage of goods does always mention the place where the goods are booked, the place of destination, and impliedly also the route by which the goods are to be carried. Therefore, if without the knowledge and consent of the party concerned the Railway choose to carry the goods by a route other than the route agreed upon or by the usual route, they do so at their own risk and cannot fall back upon the terms contained in the Risk Note contrary to the terms of which they carry the goods by a different route, nor can they claim that they are absolved from the general statutory liability of a bailee. If the goods are thus carried along a longer route and there is delay and consequent deterioration of the goods, the Railway will be liable for damages due to deterioration in spite of the Risk Note. Bengal Nagpur Railway Company, Limited v. Messrs Haji Latif Abdulla A I R 1937 Cal. 410 ; Srimati Sabitri Thakurain v. F. A. Savi A I R 1927 Pat. 354 ; Vali Mahomed Hamed v. G. 1. P. Railway Company I L R 46 Bom. 830 and Janki Das Gobind Ram v. The Secretary of State for India in Council I L R 47 All. 234 rel. East Indian Railway v. Rahimullah Illahi Baksh A I R 1928 Lah. 349 held not relevant. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: AMIN AHMED, C. J. This appeal is on behalf of the plaintiff. It involves an important question as to the rights and liabilities of the public and of the Railways when goods are despatched under the owner's Risk Note, Form A. 2. In the present case, the material facts are admitted. On the 7th of April 1951, the plaintiff consignee booked 200 bags of masur dal, weighing 505 maunds, to be carried by the E. B. Railway from Alamdanga Station to Dacca. Instead of carrying them to Dacca, the consignment was carried to Kumarkhali Station, and from there the bags were re despatched to Dacca. Out of the entire consignment, 122 bags were…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492