Remanded

Union of India v. M/S Karimganj Saraogi Trading Co. 437, Barua Market, 3RD Floor, M.G.Road, Guwahati, Assam

Gauhati HC9 Mar 2018MFA/119/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the Railway Claims Tribunal judgment as the Tribunal failed to refer to materials available on record, specifically the petitioner's written statement and seal labels. The matter is remanded for a fresh hearing after the Tribunal takes note of these documents.

What did the court decide?

Judgment dated 14/09/2011 set aside; matter remanded to Railway Claims Tribunal for fresh hearing; parties directed to appear on 05/04/2018.

Union of India Vs M/S Karimganj Saraogi… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010161792011

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : MFA 119/2011

¶5

1:UNION OF INDIA

¶6

REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI-11, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:M/S KARIMGANJ SARAOGI TRADING CO. 437, BARUA MARKET, 3RD FLOOR, M.G.ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM CO., 437, BARUA MARKET, 3RD FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM.

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MSB DEVI

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : MR.G KHANDELIA

¶11

BEFORE

¶12

HON BLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 09-03-2018

¶15

Heard Mr. G. Goswami, learned counsel of the appellant. Also heard Mr. G. Khandelia, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶16

This appeal under section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 is directed against the Judgment Order dated 14/09/2011 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Gauhati in case No. O.A-1161/2007(Old), O.A-1/GHY/2007/1161(New) by the impugned judgment by the appellant was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2,78,268/(Two Lakh Seventy Eight Thousand Two Hundred Sixty Eight) along with interest @ 6% from

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

the date of Order.

¶19

Amongst various grounds urged by the learned counsel for the appellant, one of the submissions is that the appellant had filed their written statement, which is available in the LCR, and that a copy of the written statement had been served to the respondent. However, in the impugned judgment, it has been mentioned by the learned Tribunal that the appellant herein had failed to file the written statement despite several opportunities. Nonetheless, in the subsequent paragraph of the judgment it has been recorded by the learned Tribunal that on examination the pleadings of both parties, the issues were framed.

¶20

In this regard, the learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the non-filing of the written statement as mentioned in the impugned judgment must read to be a typing/clerical error because as per the next paragraph of the judgment, the learned Tribunal had not only examined the pleading of both the parties, but proceeded to frame the issues.

¶21

Moreover, in respect of the issue No. 1, the learned Tribunal has, inter-alia recorded that the seal and card labels were not produced. However, on examining the LCR it is found contain the seal and card labels in an envelope.

¶22

This court is of the view that the learned tribunal had failed to apply its judicial mind by not referring to the materials which are very much available on record. The written statement as well as the seal and card labels are on record. Under such circumstances, this court is of the view that this situation calls for an order of remand by setting aside the impugned judgment and order, which this court orders.

¶23

On receipt of the LCR, the learned Tribunal is directed to take note of the written statement as well as other materials on records, including the seal and card labels which are kept contained in the envelope.

¶24

It is needless to say that the learned Railway Claims Tribunal shall proceed to hear both the parties on the basis of material available on record by taking note of the materials contained in the record. At this point the learned counsel for the respondent submits that as he is not technically aware, by looking at the seal and card labels, he cannot say whether the said seal and cards pertain to the sealing of wagons from the original destinations or those are the seal and card labels sealed at the transit shipment point. Therefore, the parties may

¶25

Page No.# 3/3

¶26

be permitted to inspect the seal and card labels. The said prayer is accepted 9) The judgment and order dated 14/09/2011 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati in case No. O.A-1161/2007(Old), O.A-1/GHY/2007/1161(New) is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Railway Claims Tribunal for fresh hearing or the basis of material on record.

¶27

The parties who are represented by their respective learned counsels, are directed to appear before the learned Railway Claims Tribunal on 05/04/2018 and by producing a certified copy of this order, shall seek further instruction from said the learned tribunal.

¶28

Return back the LCR immediately.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Union of India v. M/S Karimganj Saraogi Trading Co. 437, Barua Market, 3RD Floor, M.G.Road, Guwahati, Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India v. M/S Karimganj Saraogi Trading Co. 437, Barua Market, 3RD Floor, M.G.Road, Guwahati, Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Union of India Vs M/S Bhawanin Trading

Md. Badshah Hussain Vs Budhin Chutia @ Buddhinda Chutia

Md. Badshah Hussain Vs Budhin Chutia @ Buddhinda Chutia

M/S Charu Enterprises Vs the Union of India

Ashoka Nanda Borah Vs Gokul Bhuyan

Nagina Devi Jain Nahar Vs Union of India