BOOTAMAL versus UNION OF INDIA

BOOTAMAL versus UNION OF INDIA

Limitation for suits against carriers for non-delivery under Article 31 of the Limitation Act, 1908, begins when reasonable time for delivery has elapsed after dispatch, not upon final refusal or based only on correspondence with the carrier. In the present case, the reasonable delivery period had expired long...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Bootamal; Respondent: Union of India
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 March 1962
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Punjab High Court Judgment and Decree Dated March 19, 1958, in RFA No. 299 of 1951
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remanded to trial court for determination of limitation in light of the Displaced Persons (Institution of Suits) Act, 1948 as amended by Act 68 of 1950.
Legal Topics
Commencement of Limitation Period, Non Delivery by Carrier, Interpretation of Limitation Act, 1908 Article 31
Limitation Law Carriage of Goods Commencement of Limitation Period Non Delivery by Carrier Interpretation of Limitation Act, 1908 Article 31

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bootamal

Appellant

Union of India

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Punjab High Court Judgment and Decree Dated March 19, 1958, in RFA No. 299 of 1951

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does limitation commence under Article 31 of the Limitation Act, 1908 for suits against carriers for non-delivery of goods?
  2. 2 What is the relevance of correspondence between parties to the commencement of limitation?
  3. 3 Can equitable considerations or estoppel affect the limitation period under Article 31?

Ratio Decidendi

Limitation for suits against carriers for non-delivery under Article 31 of the Limitation Act, 1908, begins when reasonable time for delivery has elapsed after dispatch, not upon final refusal or based only on correspondence with the carrier. In the present case, the reasonable delivery period had expired long before suit was filed, thus the suit was barred by limitation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remanded to trial court for determination of limitation in light of the Displaced Persons (Institution of Suits) Act, 1948 as amended by Act 68 of 1950.

Orders

  • Remand to trial court for decision solely on limitation under the Displaced Persons (Institution of Suits) Act, 1948 and Amendment Act 1950;
  • Parties to be allowed to lead evidence on displaced person status and limitation;