Skip to content


Dolatram Dwarkadas Vs. the Bombay, Baroda and Central India Ry. Co. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Application No. 234 of 1913
Judge
Reported inAIR1914Bom176; (1914)16BOMLR525; 25Ind.Cas.380
AppellantDolatram Dwarkadas
RespondentThe Bombay, Baroda and Central India Ry. Co.
Excerpt:
railway receipt-document of title-negotiability-endorsee can sue railway company for loss of goods.;a railway receipt is a mercantile document of title. the endorsee of the receipt has, therefore, sufficient interest in the goods covered by it to sue the railway company for their loss.;amarchand and co. v. ramdas (1913) 15 bom. l.r. 890 followed. - .....the point just mentioned we agree with -his findings of fact, and now order that the decree be made in the plaintiff's favour in the terms of those findings. the defendant-company must pay all the.....
Judgment:

Beaman, J.

1. After having given this nice question our most careful consideration we think that in view of the recent decision of this appeal Court in Amarchand & Co. v. Ramdas (1918) 15 Bom. L.R. 890, it must be taken as settled law that a railway receipt is a mercantile document of title. That being so, we think it necessarily follows that the endorsee of such a railway receipt has sufficient interest in the goods covered by it to maintain an action of this kind. We are, therefore, of opinion that the decision of the Subordinate 'Judge with Small Cause Court powers was not according to law. Reversing his decision upon the point just mentioned we agree with -his findings of fact, and now order that the decree be made in the plaintiff's favour in the terms of those findings. The defendant-Company must pay all the costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //