1891 (7) TMI 1 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Liability of common carriers under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
2. Interpretation of the Carriers' Act, 1865, in relation to the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
3. Applicability of common law principles to common carriers in India.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Liability of Common Carriers under the Indian Contract Act, 1872:
The primary issue was whether the Indian Contract Act, 1872, altered the liability of common carriers, reducing it to the standard of care required of all bailees. The High Court of Bombay had previously held that the Act relieved common carriers from their traditional liability as insurers, making them responsible only for the care specified under the Act. Conversely, the High Court of Calcutta maintained that the liability of common carriers was not affected by the Act of 1872.

The judgment concluded that the Indian Contract Act, 1872, was not intended to alter the law applicable to common carriers. The Act of 1872 did not aim to provide a complete code for contracts but to define and amend certain parts of the existing law. Therefore, the liability of common carriers as insurers remained intact, as the Act did not expressly repeal the Carriers' Act, 1865.

2. Interpretation of the Carriers' Act, 1865, in Relation to the Indian Contract Act, 1872:
The Carriers' Act, 1865, defined the liability of common carriers and allowed them to limit their liability through special contracts, except for negligence. The Indian Contract Act, 1872, did not repeal the Carriers' Act, 1865, and explicitly stated that nothing in the Act of 1872 would affect any statute not expressly repealed.

The judgment emphasized that the Carriers' Act, 1865, was preserved intact and that the common law duties of common carriers were not intended to be altered by the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The provisions of the Carriers' Act, such as the ability to charge extra rates for higher risks, were considered still relevant and applicable.

3. Applicability of Common Law Principles to Common Carriers in India:
The judgment recognized that the common law of England governed the duties and liabilities of common carriers in India, as acknowledged by the Indian Legislature in the Carriers' Act, 1865. The common law imposed a duty on common carriers to act as insurers for the goods entrusted to them, a duty that was not based on contract but on their public employment for reward.

The judgment concluded that the Indian Contract Act, 1872, did not intend to codify or alter the common law principles applicable to common carriers. The Act's provisions on bailments did not encompass the specific duties of common carriers, and the general language of the Act could not be construed to override the established common law duties.

Conclusion:
The judgment favored the interpretation of the High Court of Calcutta, holding that the Indian Contract Act, 1872, did not alter the liability of common carriers as insurers. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.