SHREE SHYAM AGENCYversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

                     [2012] 9 S.C.R. 805


                  SHREE SHYAM AGENCY                               A
                               v.
                UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS
               (Civil Appeal .No. 7589 of 2012)
                     OCTOBER 18, 2012
                                                                   B
   [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.]

    RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987:

     ss. 13(1) and 16 - Claim petition - lmpleadment of parties    c
- Consignment booked under "Self" basis - Delivered to a third
party without authority - Claim petition by consigner against
Railways claiming value· of goods for non-delivery -
Applications for impleadment by appellant claiming to be an
interested party - Application for impleadment of three other      0
persons - Held: In the claim petition what the Tribunal has to
inquire into and determine is the claim against the Railway
Administration for its fault in discharging its responsibilities
under the Railways Act, Rules and Regulations and not the
inter se disputes between the claimants and third parties -        E
There is no error in the order of the Tribunal rejecting the
application for impleadment and the High Court rightly
affirmed the order - Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 - ss.
16, 18 - Railways Act, 1989 - ss. 65 and 74 - Railways (Manner
of Delivery of Consignments and Sale Proceeds in the
Absence of Railway Receipt), Rules, 1990 - Railway Claims          F
Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1989.

     The claimant-respondent no. 3, a company having its
head office at Chennai was engaged in the business of
manufacture and sale of white crystal sugar. It was the            G
case of the claimant that a dealer, namely, 'SAK' placed
an order with the claimant for purchase of free sale sugar
with payment conditions stipulating that the endorsed
railway receipts would be released on receipt of entire
                             805                                   H
   806      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2012] 9 S.C.R.

A sale consideration; that the claimant booked the
  consignment on 1.2.201 O for transportation from
  Kumbakonam to Fatuha, Bihar and that the railway
  receipts were drawn as "Self' and were in the custody
  of the claimant and that the purchaser was expected to
B remit the sale price and get the railway receipts endorsed
  in its favour. The goods reached the destination on
  10.2.1010. The buyer failed to pay the sale price and the
  goods, as stated by the appellant, were kept at the railway
  godown incurring wharfage charges; that the claimant
C sent a lettei to the Senior DGM/Southern Railway/Trichy
  on 23.4.2010 and informed that the railway receipts were
  in the custody of the claimant and requested either to
  shift the consignment to other destination or bring it back
  to Kumbakonam. The claimant was, however, informed
  on 4.5.2010 by the Railways that the consignment was
0
  delivered at Fatuha on 10.2.2010 on the strength of
  Indemnity Note without disclosing the person to whom
  it was delivered. The claimant-respondent no. 3 filed a
  claim petition bearing OA No. (1) 2 of 2010, against the
  Southern and Eastern Central Railways before the
E Railway Claims Tribunal stating that since the
  consignments were booked under "Self" basis, the
  delivery to a third party was without authority and
  amounted        to    negligence,      misconduct       and
  misappropriation and, therefore, the Railway
F Administration was legally liable to pay compensation
  being the value of the goods for non-delivery.

       In the claim petition, the appellant filed I.A. 3/2011 for
  intervention claiming that it was an interested party and
G its presence was necessary for a proper adjudication of
  the claim. l.A.4/2011 was preferred by respondent no. 2,
  the Central Railway, to implead three other parties
  contending that the Railway Claims Tribunal had no
  jurisdiction to proceed with the case since it involved
H contractual disputes, criminal conspiracy, cheating and
     SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                 807


that a complaint filed by the said parties was pending           A
before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The Tribunal
dismissed both the applications holding that inter se
disputes between private parties could not be decided by
the Tribunal in a claim petition. The revision petitions filed
by the appellant and the Railways were dismissed by the          B
High Court.

     In the instant appeal the question for consideration
before the Court was: whether the appellant was legally
entitled to intervene in a claim petition filed by respondent C
no. 3 u/s 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.

    Dismissing the appeal, the Court

     HELD: 1.1 It is evident from the preamble that the
Claims Tribunal has been established under the Tribunal 0
Act, 1987 for inquiring into and determining the claims
against the Railway Administration for loss, destruction,
damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or the
goods entrusted to it to be carried by railway and not for
adjudication of any claim or dispute against a third party. E
Section 13 lays down the jurisdiction, powers and
authority of the Claims Tribunal. Section 16 provides for
an application to be made to the Claims Tribunal in
respect of the matters enumerated in sb-s.(1) and sub-
s.(1A) of s.13. S~ction 18 prescribes the procedure and
powers in this regard of the Claims Tribunal. On a conjoint F
reading of the provisions of the Act, it is elem- that the
Tribunal has been constituted to adjudicate the claim
made against the Railways and not against a third party.
The claim petition, it is seen, is based on the contract of
carriage entered into between the claimant and the G
Railways. The question to be decided by the Tribunal is
whether the Railway Administration has caused any loss,
destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of
animals or goods entrusted to it to be carried by railway
or the refund of fares or freight or for compensation for H
    808    SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2012] 9 S.C.R.

A death or injury to tne passengers as a result of railway
  accidents or untoward incidents etc. [para 10-12] [812-E-
  G-H; 813-A-8; 814-8-C-F; 816-A-D]

         1.2 Rule 5 of the Railways (Manner of Delivery of
    Consignments and Sale Proceeds in the Absence of
8
    Railway Receipt), Rules, 1990 deals with delivery of
    perishable artic~es when the railway receipt is not
    forthcoming. Sub-r. (2) of Rule 3 specifically states that,
    when the railway receipt is not forthcoming and the
C   consignment is addressed to "Self', delivery shall not be
    made unless Indemnity Note, duly executed in Forms 1-A
    and 1-8 are produced by the persons claiming delivery of
    the consignment. The appellant or the Railway
    administration has no case that the consignee had
    presented the railway receipt for claiming the goods. On
D   the other hand, it has been the specific stand of the
    Railway Administration that the consignment was
    delivered at Fatuha on 10.2.2010 to a third party on the
    strength of "Indemnity Note" and not on production of
    the "Railway Receipt". [para 15-16] [819-8-D-H; 820-A;
E   821-C]

       1.4 On going through the Railways Act, 1989, the
  Tribunal Act as well as the 1990 Rules and the statutory
  forms, this Court is of the considered view that what the
F Tribunal has to inquire into and determine is the claim
  against the Railway Administration, that is, whether the
  Railway Administration is at fault in discharging its
  responsibilities under the Railways Act, Rules and
  Regulations and not the inter se disputes between the
G claimants and third parties. In view of the facts and
  circumstances of the case, there is no error in the view
  taken by the Tribunal, which has rightly been affirmed by
  the High Court. [par:a 18-19] [825-8-D]

      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION :Civil Appeal No.
H 7589 of 2012.
     SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                        809


     From the Judgment and Order dated 09.09.2011 of the                 A
High Court of Judicature at Madras in C.R.P. (PD) No. 1713
of 2011.

    Saurav Agarwal, Vipul Sharda, Gaurav Agrawal for the
Appellant.
                                                                         B
    C.A. Sundram, Pravin H. Parekh, Harish Chandra,
Shashank Kumar, Zafar lnayat, E.R. Kumar, Vishal Prasad,
Ekansh Mishra, Yogesh, Kshtrashal Raj (For Parekh & Co.),
Shalini Kumar, Shreekant N. Terdal, P.S. Parmar, Alok Kumar,
Shakeen Parmar for the Respondents.                                      c
     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

     K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. 1. Leave granted.

      2. We are, in this appeal, concerned with the question             D
whether the appellant"is legally entitled to be intervened in a
claim petition filed by the 3rd respondent herein under Section
16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 (for short 'Tribunal
Act').
                                                                         E
       3. The claim petition OA No. (1) 2 of 2010 was preferred
by the 3rd respondent against the Southern and Eastern
Central Railways before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai
Bench claiming an amount of Rs.9,46,85,726/- together with the
interest@ 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition
                                                                         F
till the date of payment and also for other consequential reliefs.

      4. In the claim petition, the appellant herein filed I.A. 3/2011
for intervention claiming to be an interested party stating that
its presence is necessary for a proper adjudication of the claim.
l.A.4/2011 was also preferred by the 2nd respondent herein               G
Central Railway to implead three other parties, namely Subham
Sugar Agencies, Umesh Chaudhary, Ex. Goods Supervisor,
Tatuha and Ambika Sugars Ltd., contending that the Railway
Claims Tribunal (for short 'Tribunal') has no jurisdiction to
proceed with the case since it involved contractual disputes,            H
    810     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2012] 9 S.C.R.


A criminal conspiracy, cheating and that a complaint filed by the
  above mentioned parties are pending before the Chief Judicial
  Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, Bihar.

        5. The Tribunal heard both the applications, i.e. l.A.3/2011
B and I.A.4/2011 and a common order was passed on 15.4.2011,
  stating that inter se disputes between private parties cannot be
  decided by the Tribunal in a claim petition. It also took the view
  that the Railway Administration through those parties is trying
  to linger on with the proceedings and, under no circumstance,
  the application for impleading the other three parties can be
C entertained. Both l.A.3/2011 and l.A.4/2011 were accordingly
  dismissed.

       6. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, C.R.P.
  (PD) No. 1713 of 2011 was preferred by the appellant herein,
D CRP (PD) No. 2152 of 2011 and CRP (PD) No. 2153 of 2011
  by Southern Railway and Central Railway, before the High
  Court of Judicature at Madras. All the three civil revision
  petitions were heard and a common order was passed on
  9.9.2011 dismissing all the revision petitions and confirming the
E order passed by the Tribunal, against which the appellant in
  C.R.P. (PD) No. 1713 of 2011 has come up before this Court
  with the present appeal. Railway Administration, however,
  accepted the order passed by the Tribunal which has been
  affirmed by the High Court by the impugned judgment.
F      7. For disposal of this appe.al, reference to few facts is
  necessary. Claimant, the third respondent herein a company
  having its head office at Chennai, is engaged in the business
  of manufacturer of white crystal sugar having its factories at
  Thirumanthankudi village, Papiasam Taluk, Thanjavur District
G and A. Chittur Village, Virudhachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.
  They used to sell free sugar in Northern Indian markets
  consisting of West Bengal, Bihar, etc. by transporting the
  consignments in racks through the services provided by the
  Railways. Railway receipts are made out showing the
H consignee as "Self' which are thereafter endorsed by the
    SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                   811
           [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
consignor to the buyer on payment of the sale price. The          A
endorsed consignee/buyer takes delivery of goods of the
respective destinations by surrender of the Railway Receipts.
Claimant states that a dealer, by name Shubham Sugar
Agencies, Kolkata, placed an order with the claimant for
purchase of 27000 quintal of free sale sugar with payment         B
conditions stipulating that the endorsed railway receipts would
be released on receipt of entire sale consideration. Claimant
stated that it has booked consignment on 1.2.2010 for
transportation from Kumbakonam to Fatuha, Bihar and that the
railway receipts were drawn as "Self' and were in the custody     c
of the claimarit and that the purchaser was expected to remit
the sale price and get the railway receipts endorsed in its
favour. The goods reached the destination on 10.2.1010. The
buyer failed to pay the sale price and the goods, as stated by
the appellant, were kept at the railway godown incurring
                                                                  0
wharfage charges. Further, it was stated that the claimant then
sent a letter to the Senior DGM/Southern Railway/Trichy on
23.4.2010 and informed that the railway receipts were in the
custody of the claimant and requested either to shift the
consignment to other destination or bring it back to              E
Kumbakonam. The claimant was, however, informed on
4.5.2010 by the Railways that the consignment was delivered
at Fatuha on 10.2.2010 on the strength of Indemnity Note
without disclosing the person· to whom it was delivered.
Claimant maintained the stand that since the consignments
were booked under "Self' basis, the delivery to a third party     F
was without authority and amounted to negligence, misconduct
and misappropriation and hence, the Railway Administration
is legally liable to pay compensation being the value of the
goods for non-delivery.
                                                                  G
    8. Appellant, however, maintained the stand that it was the
purchaser of sugar from the claimant through broker Shubham
Sugar Agencies, Kolkata and that the entire payment was
made by it on instruction through various instruments like
cheques/RTGS etc. which was accepted and acknowledged by          H
    812     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2012] 9 S.C.R.

A the claimant. Further, it was also pleaded that the claimant has
  suppressed the full facts. It was stated that the appellant had
  not obtained the delivery of sugar without payment and out of
  the total consideration of Rs.7,87,52,850/-, it had already paid
  Rs. 7,30,22,052.40 and the balance of a sum of
s Rs.57,30,797.60 was offered, but the claimant did not accept.
        9. We are, in this appeal, primarily concerned with the
  question whether the appellant has got the right to get itself
  impleaded in the Claim Petition No. OA(1) No.2 of 2010
C pending before the Tribunal and whether the findings recorded
  by the Tribunal as well as the High Court are legally sustainable
  or not. Since the claim petition is pending before. the Tribunal,
  we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
  But the question whether the Railway Administration and the
  appellant therein are proper and necessary parties to the claim
D petition, has to be decided.

       10. The Tribunal has been established under the Tribunal
  Act, 1987. Reference to its preamble would indicate the
  purpose and object of its creation. The Preamble of the Tribunal
E Act, 1987 reads as follows:

               "An Act to provide for establishment of a Railway
         Claims Tribunal for inquiring into and determining claims
         against a railway administration for loss, destruction,
         damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods
F      . entrusted to it to be carried by railway or for the refund of
         fares or freight or for compensation for death or injury to
         passengers occurring as a result of railway accidents or
         untoward incidents and for matters connected therewith or
         incidental thereto."
G
    It is evident from the preamble that the Tribunal has been
    established for inquiring into and determining the claims
    against the Railway Administration for loss, destruction,
    damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or the goods
H
     SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                       813
            [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
entrusted to it to be carried by railway and not for adjudication       A
of any claim or dispute against a third party.

     11. Chapter Ill of the Tribunal Act deals with the jurisdiction,
powers and authority of the Claims Tribunal. Section 13 of the
Tribunal Acts reads as follows:
                                                                        B
          "13. Jurisdiction, powers and authority of
     Claims Tribunal.-(1) The Claims Tribunal shall exercise,
     on and from the appointed day, all such jurisdiction, powers
     and authority as were exercisable immediately before that
     day by any civil court or a Claims Commissioner                    C
     appointed under the provisions of the Railways Act,-

     (a) relating to the responsibility of the railway
     administrations as carriers under Chapter VII of the
     Railways Act in respect of claims for-                             D

             (i)    compensation for loss, destruction, damage,
                    deterioration or non-delivery of animals or
                    goods entrusted to a railway administration
                    for carriage by railway;
                                                                        E
             (ii)   compensation payable under section 82A of
                    the Railways Act or the rules made
                    thereunder; and

     (b) in respect of the claims for refund of fares or part           F
     thereof or for refund of any freight paid in respect of
     animals or goods entrusted to a railway administration to
     be carried by railway.

     (1A) The Claims Tribunal shall also exercise, on and from
     the date of commencement of the provisions of section              G
     124A of the Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), all such
     jurisdiction, powers and authority as were exercisable
     immediately before that date by any civil court in respect
     of claims for compensation now payable by the railway
                                                                        H
    814       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2012] 9 S.C.R.


A         administration under section 124A of the said Act or the
          rules made thereunder.

          (2) The provisions of the Railways Act 1989 (24 of 1989)
          and the rules made thereunder shall, so far as may be, be
          applicable to the inquiring into or determining, any claims
B
          by the Claims Tribunal under this Act."

    Section 16 of the Tribunal Act deals with the application to
    Claims Tribunal and reads as follows:

c         "16. Application to Claims Tribunal.- (1) A person seeking
          any relief in respect of the matters referred to in sub-
          sections ( 1) or sub-section (1A) of section 13 may make
          an application to the Claims Tribunal.

          (2) Every application under sub-section (1) shall be in such
D         form and be accompanied by such documents or other
          evidence and by such fee in respect of the filing of such
          application and by such other fees for the service or
          execution of processes as may be prescribed :

E               Provided that no such fee shall be payable in respect
          of an application under sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of sub-
          section (1) or, as the case may be, sub-section (1A) of
          section 13."

F   Section 18 of the Tribunal Act deals with the procedure and
    powers of Claims Tribunal and the same reads as follows:

                 "18. Procedure and powers of Claims Tribunal.-
          ( 1) The Claims Tribunal shall not be bound by the
          procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
G         (5 of 1908), but shall be guided by the principles of nature
          justice and, subject to the other provisions of this Act and
          of any rules, the Claims Tribunal shall have powers to
          regulate its own procedure including the fixing of places
          and times of its enquiry.
H
SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INOIA                   815
       [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
(2) The Claims Tribunal shall decide every application as      A
expeditiously as possible and ordinarily every application
shall be decided on a perusal of documents, written
representations and affidavits and after hearing such oral
arguments as may be advanced.
                                                               B
(3) The Claims Tribunal shall have, for the purposes of
discharging its functions under this Act, the same power
as are vested in a Civil Court under the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), while trying a suit, in respect
of the following matters, namely :
                                                               c
 (a)   summoning and enforcing the attendance of any
       person and examining him on oath;

 (b)   requiring the discovery and production of
       documents;                                              o
 (c)   receiving evidence on affidavits;

 (d)   subject to the provisions of sections 123 and 124
       of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872),
       requisitioning any public record or document or         E
       copy of such record or document from any office;

 (e)   issuing commissions for the examination of
       witnesses or documents;

 (f)   reviewing its decisions;                                F

 (g)   dismissing an application for default or deciding it
       ex parte;

 (h)   setting aside any order of dismissal of any             G
       application for default or any order passed by it ex
       pa rte;

 (i)   any other mater which may be prescribed."

Rule 44 of the Railway Claims Tribunal (Procedure) Rules,      H
    816          SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2012] 9 S.C.R.


A 1989 confers inherent powers on the Tribunal to meet the ends
  of justice. On a conjoint reading of the above mentioned
  provisions, it is clear that the Tribunal has been constituted to
  adjudicate the claim made against the Railyvays and not against
  a third party. The claim petition, it is seen, is based on the
B contract of carriage entered into between the claimant and the
  railways.

        12. The question to be decided by the Tribunal is whether
  the Railway administration has caused any loss, destruction,
C damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods
  entrusted to it to be carried by railway or the refund of fares or
  freight or for compensation for death or injury to the passengers
  as a result of railway accidents or untoward incidents etc.
  Chapter Ill of the Act deals with the jurisdiction, powers and
  authority of the Tribunal.
D
        13. Section 13(1 )(a) of the Tribunal Act, as already
  indicated, confers exclusive jurisdiction on the Tribunal to decide
  the responsibilities of the Railways as carriers under Chapter
  VI I of the Railways Act, 1989 in respect to the above mentioned
E claims made against the railways. Chapter IX of the Railways
  Act, 1989 deals with carriage of goods. Section 61 of the
  Railways Act, 1989 says that every railway administration shall
  maintain the rate-books etc. for carriage of goods and Section
  62 imposes conditions for receiving etc. of goods. Section 65
F is also important for, the purpose of disposal of this case and
  hence extracted hereunder:

          "65. Railway receipt. (1) A railway administration shall,-
           (a)     in a case where the goods are to he loaded by a
G                  person entrusting such goods, on the completion of
                   such loading; or

           (b)     in any other case, on the acceptance of the goods
                   by it, issue a railway receipt in such form as may
H                  be specified by the Central Government.
    SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                     817
          [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
          (2) A railway receipt shall be prima facie evidence       A
    of the weight and the number of packages stated therein:

           Provided that in the case of a consignment in wagon-
    load or train-load and the weight or the number of
    packages is not checked by a railway servant authorized
                                                                    B
    in this behalf, and a statement to that effect is recorded in
    such railway receipt by him, the burden of proving the
    weight or, as the case may be, the number of packages
    stated therein, shall lie on the consignor, the consignee or
    the endorsee."
                                                                    c
Section 74 of the Railways Act, 1989 deals with the passing
of property in the goods covered by railway receipt and the
same reads as follows:

    "74. Passing of property in the goods covered by                0
    railway receipt.- The property in the consignment covered
    by a railway receipt shall pass to the consignee or the
    endorsee, as the case may be, on the delivery of such
    railway receipt to him and he shall have all the rights and
    liabilities of the consignor."
                                                                    E
Section 76 of the Railways Act, 1989 deals with the surrender
of railway receipt and reads as follows:

          "76. Surrender of railway receipt.- The railway
    administration shall deliver the consignment under a            F
    railway receipt on the surrender of such railway receipt:

          Provided that in case the railway receipt is not
    forthcoming, the consignment may be delivered to the
    person, entitled in the opinion of the railway administration   G
    to receive the goods, in such manner as may be
    prescribed."

Section 77 deals with the power of railway administration to
deliver goods or sale proceeds thereof in certain cases which
reads as follows:                                                   H
    818          SUPREME COURT REPORTS                        [2012] 9 S.C.R.

A                "77. Power of railway administration to deliver
          goods or sale proceeds thereof in certain cases.-
          Where no railway r~ceipt is forthcoming and any
          con~ignment or the sale proceeds of any consignment are
          claimed by two or more persons, the railway administration
B         may withhold delivery of such consignment or sale
          proceeds, as the case may be, and shall deliver such
          consignment or sale proceeds in such manner as may be
          prescribed."

  Section 87 of the Railways Act, 1989 confers rule making
C power on the Central Government, the relevant portion of which
  reads as under:

                 "87. Power to make rules in respect of matters
          in this Chapter.- (1) The Central Government may, by
D         notification, make rules to carry out the purposes of this
          Chapter.

                  (2) In particular, and without prejudice to the
          generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide
          for all or any of the following matters namely:-
E
                 )()()(                    )()()(               )()()(


                 )()()(                    )()()(               )()()(


           (e)     the manner in which the consignment may be
F
                   delivered without a railway receipt under section
                   76;

           (f)     the manner of delivery of consignment or the sale
                   proceeds to the person entitled thereto under
G                  section 77;

                   )()()(         )()()(             )()()(


                   )()()(         )()()(            xxx''

H         14. The Central Government in exercise of its powers
    SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                   819
           [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
conferred by Clauses (e) and (f) of Section 87(2) of the          A
Railways Act, 1989 read with Section 22 of the General Clauses
Act, 1897 has framed the Railways (Manner of Delivery of
Consignments and Sale Proceeds in the Absence of Railway
Receipt), Rules, 1990 (for short "1990 Rules").
                                                                  8
     15. The appellant or the Railway administration has no
case that M/s Subham Sugar Agencies, Calcutta, the
consignee had presented the railway receipt for claiming the
goods. On the other hand, it has been the specific stand of the
railway administration that the consignment was delivered at      C
Fatuha on 10.2.2010 to a third party on the strength of
"Indemnity Note" and not on production of the "Railway
Receipt". 1990 Rules, as already indicated, deals with the
manner of delivery of consignments and sale proceeds in the
absence of railway receipt. Sub-rules (1) and (2) of Rule 3 of
1990 Rules is relevant for our purpose and the same is            D
extracted hereunder:

    "3. Delivery of consignments when the railway
    receipt is not forthcoming:- (1) Where the railway
    receipt is not forthcoming, the consignment may be            E
    delivered to the person, who in the opinion of the railway
    administration is entitled to receive the goods and who
    shall receive the same on the execution of any Indemnity
    Note as specified in Form I:
                                                                  F
         Provided; however, that if the consignee is a
    Government official in his official capacity, such delivery
    may be made on unstamped Indemnity Note).

          (2) Where the railway receipt is not forthcoming and
    the consignment is addressed by the sender to self,           G
    delivery shall not be made unless Indemnity Note, duly
    executed in Forms I-A and 1-8 are produced by the
    persons claiming delivery of the consignment."

Rule 5 of the 1990 Rules deals with delivery of perishable        H
    820          SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  (2012] 9 S.C.R.

A articles when the railway receipt is not forthcoming and the
  same reads as follows:

                 "(5) Delivery of perishable articles when the
          railway receipt is not forthcoming:- (1) notwithstanding
          anything contained in these rules, where the consignment
B
          consists of perishable articles and the railway receipt is
          not forthcoming, such consignment may be delivered to the
          person who, in the opinion of the railway administration is
          entitled to receive such consignments, and such person
          shall take delivery subject to the following conditions,
c         namely:-

           (a)     if the invoice copy of the railway receipt is available
                   at the time of taking delivery and the booking is to
                   be named consignee who is claiming delivery, such
D                  person shall, before taking delivery execute an
                   Indemnity Note specified in Form I; or

           (b)     (i) if the invoice copy of the railway receipt is not
                   available at the time of taking delivery; or
E                        (ii) if such invoice copy is available and the
                         consignment is booked to "self',

          Such person shall, deposit an amount equivalent to the
          cost of consignment by way of security apart from freight
F         and other charges before taking delivery of such
          consignment.

                 (2) If any amount has been deposited by way of
          security under clause (b) of sub-rule (1), such amount shall
          be refunded by the railway administration on production of
G         the original railway receipt within six months from the date
          of taking such delivery.

                 (3) In the absence of original railway receipt refund
          may be granted on execution of an Indemnity Note in Form
H         I or I-A and 1-B, as the case may be, provided the invoice
    SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                       821
           [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
    copy of the railway receipt is available and the particulars       A
    of consignment can be connected with reference to the
    invoice copy, within six months from the date of taking
    delivery."

     16. Form I under Rule 3(1) of the 1990 Rules deals with
                                                                       8
the "Indemnity Note" that when the consignment is to be
delivered to the 'person', not to 'self. If it is to a 'person' then
he has to furnish an indemnity note signed by the 'consignee'.
Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 specifically states that, when the railway
receipt is not forthcoming and the consignment is addressed
to "Self', delivery shall not be made unless Indemnity Note, duly      C
executed in Forms I-A and 1-B are produced by the persons
claiming delivery of the consignment. The relevant portion of
Form 1-A and 1-B are extracted below for easy reference:

                              "Form 1-A                                D

                        [See Rule 3(2)]
                   FORM OF INDEMNITY NOTE

     - - - RAILWAY                                                     E
                        JNDEMNITY NOTE

    ** I/We hereby acknowledge to have received from
_ _ _ _ Railway              valued at Rs.                which
was dispatched by ** me/us and booked to self/as value
                                                                       F
payable, from the            Station of the             Railway
on or about the           day of          the railway receipt for
which has been                      and ** for myself, my heirs,
executors and administrators I and for our Company I Firm, their
assigns, and successors.
                                                                       G
      ** I/We undertake in consideration of such delivery as
aforesaid to hold.

     * President of India, his agents and servants the
_ _ _ _ _ railway administration, its agents and servants              H
    822      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2012) 9 S.C.R.


A harmless and indemnified in respect of all claims to the said
  goods.

        ** I/We also undertake to pay on demand to the railway
  administration freight charges, undercharges, wharfage and any
  other charges that may be subsequently found due in respect
8
  of this transaction.

         And ** I/We the undersigned, signing below the consignor
  of these goods certify that the first signor is the bona fide owner
  of the goods; and that ** I/We undertaken the whole of the said
C liability equally with the consignor, and for this purpose ** I/We
  affix** my/our signature hereto.

    Signature of Witness            Signature of Consignor

    Father's name                    **Father's name
D
    Age                             Age

    Profession                      Profession

    Residence                      Residence
E


                           Designation and Seal of the Co./Form

F
                             Registered Office/Place of business"
    Signature of witness_ _ _Signature of Surety_ _ __

    Father's name- - - - -**Father's name- - - - - -
G


    Profession- - - - - - Profession- - - - - - - -"

H
    SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                   823
           [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
                            "Form 1-8                              A
                         [See Rule 3(2)]
                  FORM OF INDEMNITY NOTE

    _ _ _ RAILWAY
                                                                   B
                        INDEMNITY NOTE

    ** I/We hereby acknowledge to have received from
_ _ _ _ Railway              valued at Rs.               which
was dispatched by                 from          Station of the     C
_ _ _ Railway on or about the                 day of        and
booked to self/as value payable, the railway receipt for which
has been                        and ** for myself, my heirs,
executors and administrators I and for our Company I Firm, their
assigns, and successors.
                                                                   D
     ** I/We undertake in consideration of such delivery· as
aforesaid to hold.

     * President of India, his agents and servants the
_ _ _ _ _ _ Railway Administration, its agents and                 E
servants harmless and indemnified in respect of all claims to
the said goods.

     ** I/We also undertake to pay on demand to the railway
Administration freight charges, wharfage and any other charges
that may be subsequent!y found due in respect of this              F
transaction.

     ** I enclose a copy of a stamp Indemnity Note executed
by the consignor and countersigned by the Station Master of
the Forwarding Station which has been duly endorsed by the         G
Consignor in my favour authorizing me to take delivery of the
consignments on his behalf.

    And ** I/We the undersigned, signing below the person
authorized by the consignor to take delivery of the goods. I       H
    824         SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2012] 9 S.C.R.

A   hereby certify that the first signor is the bona fide owner of the
    goods and ** I/We undertake the whole of the said liability
    equally with the signor, and for this purpose **I/We affix ** my/
    our signature hereby.

       Signature       of   Witness     -------      Signature     of
8
    Consignor

          Father's name                Father's name

          Age                       Age
c
          Profession               Profession

          Residence                Residence


D
                            Designation and Seal of the Co./Form



                             Registered Office/Place of business"
E
    Signature of witness_ _ _Signature of Surety_ _ __

    Father's name
                   - - - - - -**Father's name- - - - -
F   Age_ _ _ _ _ _Age_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

    Profession._ _ _ _ Profession _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _"

        17. In Form 1-A, Indemnity Note, the consignor has to sign
  certifying that his is the bona fide owner of goods. Form 1-8,
G Indemnity Note, has to be signed by the consignor authorizing
  the person to take delivery. The copy of a stamped Indemnity
  Note has to be executed by the consignor and counter signed
  by the Station Master of the forwarding station. In other words,
  all the formalities prescribed under Form 1-A and Form 1-8
H
       SHREE SHYAM AGENCY v. UNION OF INDIA                 825
              [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.]
have to be complied with, when the Railway Receipt is not           A
forthcoming and the consignment is addressed by the sender
to Self. The Railways cannot effect delivery unless those
formalities have been complied with.

     18. On going through the Railways Act, 1989, the Tribunal      8
Act as well as the 1990 Rules and the statutory forms, we are
of the considered view that what the Tribunal has to inquire into
and determine is the claim against the Railway Administration,
that is whether the Railway Administration is at fault in
discharging its responsibilities under the Railways Act, Rules      C
and Regulations and not the inter se disputes between the
claimants and third parties.

     19. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the
case, we find no error in the view taken by the Tribunal, which
was affirmed by the· High Court. Consequently, the appeal is        D
dismissed. We, however, make it clear that we are not
expressing our opinion on the merits of the case and the same
has to be adjudicated by the Tribunal in accordance with law.

R.P.                                        Appeal dismissed.       E