AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is an appeal preferred by the original plaintiff who sued the Gondal Railway which is now the Saurashtra Railway as defendant 1, Jodhpur
Railway as defendant S and one Shah Nrusinhdas Satramdas an defendant. The suit was dismissed against all 3 defendants on several grounds. It
was dismissed against the two defendants on the ground that proper notice u/s 80, Civil P.C., was not given though a notice u/s 77. Railways Act
was given. Mr. Mody who now appears for the plaintiff says he wants to make the Jodhpur Railway only liable, but in order to make the Jodhpur
Railway liable, be ought to have obtained the sanction of the Central Government u/s 86, Civil P.C. because the Jodhpur Railway was the property
of the Jodhpur Durbar and in order to sue the Jodhpur Durbar, sanction of the Central Government u/s 86, Civil P.C., was necessary. That has not
admittedly been done. Moreover no legal notice u/s 60, Civil P.C. has been given to defendant 1 as well as to defendant 2. It may be that Section
80, Civil P.C. was applied to Saurashtra in an amended form but we have to see as to what the law was on the date of the suit. If it was prayed to
make the Jodhpur Railway liable, then he ought to have obtained the sanction of the Central Government u/s 86 and he ought to have also given a
legal notice u/s 80, Civil P.C. If further as he says the Jodhpur Railway was merged, then again he ought to have given a fresh notice after the
merger. That he has not done. It is quite clear, therefore, that the suit is bad against Jodhpur Railway for want of notice u/s 80 as well as for want
of sanction u/s 86.
The lower Court was therefore right in dismissing the suit against the Jodhpur Railway. Under the circumstances we confirm the decision of the
lower Court and dismiss the appeal with costs.