The Gauhati High Court dismissed an appeal under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 against an order refusing a refund for freight undercharges and rebate miscalculations. The Court found the Tribunal's decision correct under the Railways Act, 1989.
The appeal is dismissed with no relief granted to the appellant.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010084532021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : MFA/142/2021
M/S RAHUL TRADING CO.
2-VANIJYA KENDRA, T.R.P. ROAD, FANCY BAZAR, GUWAHATI-781001.
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI, ASSAM-781011.
2:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY CHURCH GATE MUMBAI- 400020
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K P MAHESWARI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NF RLY
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
For the Appellant : Ms. M. Sharma,
Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. H.P. Goala, Advocate.
Date of Hearing : 28.11.2022.
Date of Judgment : 12.05.2023.
Page No.# 2/3
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)
Heard Ms. M. Sarma, learned counsel representing the appellant as well as Mr. H.P. Goala, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. This is an appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 against the judgment and order dated 26.02.2021 passed in Original Application No.OA III-304/2011 by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench.
3. Three consignments of onions in train load were booked under Invoice No/RR No 02+03/212004096+97, 05+06/212004132+33, 07/212004166 on 27.05.2010, 07/06/2010, 23.06.2010 from MGG to CGS. The value of the claim was Rs.40,6892/-.
4. The issues framed are-
iii. Wrong collection of Terminal Charges.
5. I have carefully gone through the impugned judgment. The claim application for refund was dismissed by the Tribunal.
6. On perusal of the impugned judgment, I find that the Tribunal has meticulously discussed the issues and arrived at a correct finding. The Railway has rightly realized undercharges of Rs.1,16,991/- in terms of Section 78(ii) of the Railways Act of 1989. The Tribunal has rightly decided
Page No.# 3/3
that the claim of refund on account of wrong calculation of NTR and the resultant calculation of the NE Region rebate is liable to be dismissed. The refund claim raised by the appellant was correctly dismissed by the Tribunal.
7. I find that the present appeal is devoid of merit and stands dismissed accordingly.
Send back the LCR accordingly.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Railway Claims Tribunal's dismissal of the refund claim for freight undercharges and rebate miscalculations was legally sustainable.
Whether the appellant's appeal regarding undercharges and terminal collection errors under Section 78(ii) of the Railways Act, 1989 had merit.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/S RAHUL TRADING CO.
THE UNION OF INDIA
Parthivjyoti Saikia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
