Partly allowed

Union of India. v. Sanjay Trading Company.

Bombay HC1 Apr 2005FA/755/1992

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against Railway Claims Tribunal order awarding compensation for damaged onion consignments due to transit delay. Court set aside decree against South Eastern Railway, reduced interest rate to 9%, and granted additional compensation of Rs. 5,000.

What did the court decide?

Decree against South Eastern Railway set aside; interest reduced to 9% p.a.; additional compensation of Rs. 5,000 granted to respondents.

Union of India. Vs Sanjay Trading Company. — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

:1:

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOBBY

¶3

 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO. 755 OF 1992

¶5

ALONG WITH

¶6

CROSS OBJECTION STAMP NO. 14517 OF 1993.

¶7

 Union of India ..Appellants

¶8

 versus

¶9

 Sanjay Trading Company ..Respondents

¶10

 Mr. A. N. Samant for the Appellants.

¶11

 Mr. R. M. Haridas i/b. P. N. Joshi for the

¶12

 Respondents.

¶13

 CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE,J.

¶14

 DATE : 1ST APRIL,2005

¶15

ORAL ORDER :

¶16

 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

 2. This appeal is filed by the Union of India
 and the cross objection is filed by the respondents

¶18

 - applicants. The Respondents - applicants was a
 dealer in onions. He signed two consignments of 451
 bags each from Nashik Road to Shalimar via Nagpur.
 According to the respondents - applicants the normal
 period of transit is 7 to 8 days but in this case it
 reached after 23 days and 20 days respectively of

¶19

:2:

¶20

 the booking, as a result the consignments were
 damaged. The respondents - applicants suffered loss
 and therefore they had filed claim application
 before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Mumbai vide
 Application No. 1260 of 1990. The claim of the
 respondents - applicants was about Rs.46,000/- for
 two consignments. The Tribunal however awarded
 Rs.12,011.25 paise with interest at the rate of 12%
 per annum.

¶21

 3. So far as Appeal by the Union of India is
 concerned, Mr. Samant contended that the Tribunal
 went wrong in passing decree against both Central
 and South Eastern Railways when Central Railway was
 already a party and therefore decree could not be
 against both the Railways. This view has been
 upheld by me in many earlier cases. Counsel for the
 respondents - applicants did not raise objection and
 therefore the decree against South Eastern Railway
 is required to be set aside.

¶22

 4. Mr. Samant also contended that award of
 interest at the rate of 12% per annum is not proper
 and it should be reduced to 9%. This submission has
 also been accepted by me earlier in many cases.
 Therefore the interest rate is required to be
 reduced to 9%.

¶23

:3:

¶24

 5. So far as cross objection is concerned,
 counsel for the respondents - applicants contended
 that in all 902 bags i.e. 451 bags each under two
 consignments were despatched from Nashik Road to
 Shalimar via Nagpur and what Tribunal has done is
 reflected in consideration of issue No.5 as under :

¶25

"Admittedly, at the time of delivery, onions
were found badly damaged. Accordingly to
the Applicants, the damage was caused
because of the inordinate delay in transit
and mishandling of the goods while in
transit. Exhibits 3 and 10, the Joint
Survey Reports concerning the two
consignments, show that the contents found
partly rotten, discoloured, softened and
emitting bad smell. The quantity assessed
under exhibit 3 were 240 bags and under
exhibit 10 were 185 bags. Damaged quantity
assessed under exhibit 3 is 110 bags (i.e.
50 per cent damage in 140 bags and 40 per
cent damage in 100 bags) and under exhibit
10 is 73.25 bags (i.e. 45 per cent damage
in 85 bags and 35 per cent in 100 bags).
Accordingly, we find that only 110 bags out
of 451 bags under R. R. No. 71917 and
only 73.25 bags out of 451 bags under R.R.
No. 719189 reached destination in bad

¶26

:4:

¶27

condition."

¶28

 Counsel for the respondents - applicants contended
 that it is true that reasoning given by the Tribunal
 is based on the joint survey report. However, he
 stated that if in a bag of 50 kgs. damage is found
 to 50% i.e. 25 kgs. of onion, it cannot be said
 that remaining 25 kgs. would be without any damage
 whatsoever. All the onions were packed in bags and
 sealed tightly, and the delay is bound to affect
 some part of the rest of the onions. Therefore,
 according to him in case of 50% damage it was not
 proper to consider that only half of the onion i.e.
 25 kgs. from out of 50 kg. would be damaged and
 nature of the damage is as per the above paragraph
 is that the onions were rotton, discoloured,
 softened and emitting bad smell. Therefore, it is
 most natural to assume in the peculiar circumstances
 of the case that though 50% damage was the actual
 damage or the total damage, there would be some
 other damage to the remaining contents of the bag.

¶29

 6. Therefore considering the fact that in all
 902 bags were despatched and considering the rate of
 65 or even lesser rate, additional compensation of
 Rs.5,000/- would be proper in the circumstances.
 Therefore, I pass the following order:

¶30

:5:

¶31

ORDER

¶32

 . First Appeal No. 755 of 1992 filed by the
 Union of India is partly allowed. Decree against
 South Eastern Railway is set aside. Similarly
 decretal amount will carry interest at the rate of
 9% per annum.

¶33

 . So far as cross objection is concerned, the
 respondents - applicants will be entitled to
 Rs.5,000/- more as additional compensation with
 interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date

¶34

 of the order of the Tribunal.

¶35

 . No order as to costs in Appeal as well as in
 the Cross objections.

¶36

 . Mr. Samant states that Union of India has

¶37

 deposited the amount in this court. After payment
 to the respondents - applicants as per the above
 order, the excess amount be refunded to the Union of
 India.

¶38

 1.04.2005 (D.G. DESHPANDE, J.)

Union of India. v. Sanjay Trading Company.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India. v. Sanjay Trading Company.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

National Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Smt. Shalini Vilas Patil and Others

The Union of India Vs M/S Sakharam Bhaurao

Shri Shyamlal Hariram Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer,Panvel

Mushtaq Ahmed Rashidsheikh and Anr. Vs Baban Ganesh Ambekar and Ors.

Bank of India Vs Shri Prabhakar v. Chavan and Others

M.S.R.T.C. Bombay Vs Zarina Hajaratkhan Pathan and Ors.