LexUNION OF INDIA versus M/S KAMAKHYA TRANSPORT PVT. LTD. ETC. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 7 S.C.R. 346 : 2025 INSC 805 Union of India v. M/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc. Etc. (Civil Appeal No(s). 7376-7379 of 2025) 05 June 2025 [Sanjay Karol* and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the Courts below had rightly held that the Railway authorities could not have raised the demand notice after the delivery of goods. Headnotes† Railways Act, 1989 – s.66 – Power to require statement relating to the description of goods – Appellant raised demand notices alleging misdeclaration of goods, for consignments sent through the Railways – Respondents paid the demands raised but sought refund of the amount paid contending that the demand notices issued after the delivery of the goods were illegal – Claim allowed by Railway Tribunal – Appeals dismissed by High Court – Interference with: Held: A consignee/owner of goods/person having charge of goods who has brought goods for the purpose of carriage has to give the Railway authorities a written statement regarding the description of the goods, to enable them to charge the appropriate rate of carriage – Under sub-sec.(4), if the statement is found to be materially false, the Railway authority is empowered to charge the goods at the required rate – No reference is made to the stage at which such a charge can be made, i.e., either before or after delivery – Thus, the legislative intent is to permit levy of charge under this Section, at either stage and not at a specific one – High Court erred in holding that penal charges can only be applied prior to the delivery of goods – Impugned order set aside – Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. [Paras 14, 18, 20] Case Law Cited Jagjit Cotton Textile Mills v. Chief Commercial Superintendent N.R. and Ors. [1998] 2 SCR 1065 : (1998) 5 SCC 126 – referred to. Union of India v. Megha Technical & Engineers Pvt. Limited, Decision of Gauhati High Court in W.A. Nos. 71-74 of 2013 – referred to. * Author [2025] 7 S.C.R. 347 Union of India v. M/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc. Etc. List of Acts Railways Act, 1989; Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. List of Keywords Description of goods; Misdeclaration of goods; Consignments sent through the Railways; Demand notices; Demand notices issued after the delivery of the goods; Goods for carriage; Appropriate rate of carriage; Levy of charge; Stage of levy of charge; Before or after delivery; Railway authorities; Railway Claims Tribunal; Refund; Punitive charges after delivery of goods; Consignee; Owner of goods; Person having charge of goods; Penal charges; Prior to the delivery of goods. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No(s). 7376-7379 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 20.12.2021 passed by the Gauhati High Court in MFA Nos. 80 and 57 of 2016 and MFA Nos. 29 and 28 of 2017 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant: K.M. Nataraj, A.S.G., Amrish Kumar, Mrs. Ameyavikrama Thanvi, Vatsal Joshi, B.k.satija, Chinmayee Chandra, Gaurang Bhushan, Sudarshan Lamba. Advs. for the Respondents: Divyansh Rathi, Himanshu Makkar, Gunjan Kumar. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Sanjay Karol, J. Leave granted. 2. The present appeals arise from the final judgment and order dated 20th December 2021 passed by the Gauhati High Court in MFA Nos.80 of 2016, 57 of 2016, 29 of 2017 and 28 of 2017 respectively, 348 [2025] 7 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports whereby the order dated 19th January 2016 of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in OA Nos.229/12, 184/12, 228/12 and 185/2012 respectively came to be affirmed. Brief facts 3. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the Appellant raised demand notices of varied amounts dated 13th October 2011, 7th April 2012, 29th October 2011, as also 7th April 2012 respectively against the respondents, alleging mis-declaration of goods; for consignments sent through the Indian Railways. The respondents paid the demands raised and thereafter, preferred separate claim petitions under Section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, before the Railway Claims Tribunal1, Guwahati Bench, seeking a refund of the amount paid. It was stated therein that the demand notices being issued after the delivery of the goods were illegal in view of Sections 73 and 74 of the Railways Act, 19892. 4. The Tribunal, allowed the claim petitions vide a common order dated 19th January 2016, and directed for refund of the amount paid in the following
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.