Kalyan Rai Surana JUDGMENT
Kalyan Rai Surana, J.
1. Heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Railways, the appellant herein. Also heard Ms. M. Sharma, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent.
2. This appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.07.2010, passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati in Application No. OA. 138/2002(Old)/OA-I/GHY/2002/0138(New). The appellant is the respondent in the said claim application, which was filed by the respondent.
3. The case of the respondent in the above referred claim application was that a consignment of sugar was booked on 26.10.2000 from station called UGR to NGC station under RR No. 257847. It was projected that the respondent was the owner of goods, holding legal title in terms of Section 74 of the Railways Act, 1989. The said consignment was said to be booked in safe, sound and secured condition under the "Railway Risk" rate after meeting all legal and statutory inspections as per Railway Rules. It was projected that the consignment had reached the destination station with undue delay in transit. It was projected that at the time of unloading, the wagon seals and card labels were absent and that the doors were having big gaps and the stacks were in disturbed condition and the wagon was found in a broken and damaged condition with cut holes. On unloading there was a shortage, which was stated to be recorded in the "unloading tally book". The Chief Goods Supervisor at New Guwahati Station was informed about such shortage by letter dated 10.11.2000, with a request to issue short delivery certificate. However, such certificate was not issued because the goods were booked under "said to contain" railway receipt remarks. In the claim application, it was mentioned that calculation of claim was 1,313 kg. i.e. 13 bags sugar found short received X Rs. 17/- per kg. = Rs. 23,321/-. The said sum was claimed along with interest at the rate of 18%. It was stated that the loss occurred in the case was caused due to gross negligence and misconduct on the part of the appellant herein and that they were guilty of breach of contract, malfeasance, misfeasance and that they are liable to compensate for the loss suffered by the respondent herein with full cost and interest. The said application under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 was filed on 30.04.2002.
4. The appellant herein had entered appearance as the respondent in the claim petition on 01.11.2002 and written statement dated 01.11.2008 was submitted on 05.01.2010. On 14.06.2010, while the appellant's witness had suited an affidavit dated 22.04.2010, the learned counsel for the respondent filed a prayer for discovery of following documents under section 18(3)(b) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 read with Rule 20(b) of Railway Claims Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1989:-
i. Original Forwarding Notes which our consignor executed in terms of IRCM-Vol-II of 1991 Rule No. 1402 read with Section 64 of Railway Act, 1989.
ii. Loading Tally book of booking station meeting compliance of IRCM-Vol-II of 1991 Rule No. 1512 & 1513.
iii. Original Railway receipt submitted by us at the time of delivery at the destination station.
iv. Seal and card labels of destination point meeting compliance of IRCM-Vol-II of 1991 rule No. 1570, 1578(a) 1713 and 1714 read with Railway Circular bearing No. C/65/O/69/ID dated 22.04.1975.
v. Copy of unloading tally and Delivery deficiency massage of destination point me........