Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges

    B.B. And C.I. Railway Company v. Shah Saharchand Kalidas

    1. The plaintiff sued to recover for the loss of a consignment of molasses. The Judge seems to have found as a fact that there had not been a theft in the running train.

    2. Therefore the Company could not escape the liability. But unfortunately the learned Judge went on to make some remarks which were not necessary for the purpose of deciding the case, and if those remarks were to stand, they might be followed in similar cases by the Subordinate Courts; and therefore it is necessary to remark that if there is a theft in a running train then the Companies are protected by Risk Notes.

    3. It is open to the plaintiff in such a case to prove that the theft did not occur in the running train, or that the theft, was brought about by the Company's servants. But if nothing more can be proved except that there was a theft in a running train, then I the Companies by the Risk Note, Form B, which is now before us, are protected. Rule is discharged with costs.

    4. Rule discharged.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    B.B. And C.I. Railway Company v. Shah Saharchand Kalidas
    (Mar 29, 1922)