Case Argument
Date : 21/11/2017
Statement showing cases in which only Claimants have filed Arguments

NOTE:-Merely posting of JIDRP website with case arguments does not mean that the case has been referred to JIDRP for conciliation. For referring a case to JIDRP for conciliation, the first and foremost condition to be observed, in accordance with Para 3.11 of JIDRP Scheme, is that for existing cases, the concerned PSUs and Railways will move a joint application before the relevant courts, inter-allia, praying for adjournment of the cases till such time the cases are heard and settled by JIDRP.

S No. Case No. Claims No. Claimant Name Amount Claimed Railway Court Code Claimant Argument Claimant Argument Date Railway Argument Railway Argument Date Joint
Application
moved
before
RCT/Court
Joint
Application
accepted
by RCT/Court
Note
filed
in JIDRP
Secretariat
Note
received
by JIDRP
Secretariat
 1  OC/87/2002  2010200136 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  244600  CR  Case Settled by RCT BOMBAY on 25-APR-14 in favour of Party  BPC DESPATCHED 25120 LITRES OF SKO VIDE RR NO.389425 DT.15.7.99 BY TW.NO.ER 60357 LOADED EX PANEWADI TO BHITONI.THE CONSINGMENT WAS ACCEPTED BY CR AT RAILWAY RISK.THE TW NEVER REACHED DESTINATION, SO A CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT WAS PREFERRED ON CENTRAL RAILWAY VIDE LETTER NO. W.LOG.FRT.2.SKO 99-00/114 DT.22.11.99 FOR RS.244600.00 BASED ON THE NON-DELIVERY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY RAILWAYS AT BHITONI.CCO VIDE LETTER NO. CL/POL/477/BHTN/12/2000/JBP DATED 10.10.200 INFORMED BPC THAT THE SUBJECT TANKWAGON WAS RECEIVED AT ITARSI ON 17.7.99 AND MARKED SICK DUE TO HOT AXLE .AS THE WAGON WAS REACHED ITARSI WITHIN TWO DAYS AND AS THE LOADING WAS NOT SUPERVISED BY RAILWAY STAFF CLAIM FOR NON-DELIVERY IS NOT ADMISSIBLE. BPC PROTESTED TO RAILWAYS ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE SUBJECT TW WAS CORRECTLY LOADED EX PANEWADI AS PER THE PLACEMENT MEMO AND LOADING CHART.RAILWAYS CONTENTION THAT THE TW WAS FOUND EMPTY WHEN REPAIRING THE HOT AXLE IS NOT JUSTIFIED AS REPAIRING OF THE HOT AXLE IS DONE TO THE CHASIS OF THE WAGON AND DOES NOT INVOLVE OPENING THE BARREL OF THE TW.MOREEVER THERE IS NO DOCUMENTARY PROOF THAT THE TW WAS EMPTY AS IT WAS NOT JOINTLY DIPPED AS PER NORMAL PROCEDURE. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.244600.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  08/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 2  OC/423/1999  2020100673 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  306055  ER  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 10-DEC-12 in favour of Party  TW NO. ER-33300 & CR-100459 BOOKED VIDE RR NO. 105574 DT.22/27.8.96 REPORTED TO DESTINATION SHAKTINAGAR AND FOUND TOP-BOTTOM SEALS MISSING. OPEN DELIVERY OBTAINED AND IN JOINT OBSERVATION FOUND SHORTAGE OF 17263 LTRS & 16916 LTRS RESPECTIVELY. HENCE CLAIM PREFERRED FOR 34179 LTRS OF SHORTAGE OF HSD. EVEN AFTER FOLLOW UP WITH E.RLY DID NOT RESPONDED TILL 1999. HENCE SUIT WAS FILED WITH RCT, BHOPAL.E.RLY GAVE OFFER OF OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT FOR AMOUNT RS.227680/- VIDE LETTER REF.NO. CCS/LAW/18/99/RCT/BPL DATED 08.02.2000. THE CONSENT WAS GIVEN BY IOC VIDE LETTER DATED 10.02.2000 AND REQUESTED FOR MAKING PAYMENT. TILL DATE NO PAYMENT RECEIVED.  02/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
 3  OC/66/2002  2020200228 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  796769  ER  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 13-OCT-15 in favour of Party  TW NO. CR-1916030 CONTAINING 64680LTRS OF HSD, LOADED VIDE RR NO.57787 DT.04.10.98 REPORTED MISSING. CLAIM PREFERRED WITH E.RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/ER/E/1/99-2000 DT.23.03.99.E.RLY ACKNOWLEDGED THE RECEIPT OF CLAIM VIDE LETTER REF.NO. F3/WR/5141/4/99/R03 DT.15.04.99.NUMBER OF REMINDERS WERE SENT VIDE LETTER DATED 12.4.99, 22.5.99, 10.6.99, 20.7.99, 30.8.99, 9.9.99, 20.9.99, 21.10.99, 1.2.2000, 13.1.2000, 31.5.2000, 27.7.2000 AND FINAL REMINDER DATED 27.4.2001. FINALLY SUIT WAS FILED WITH RCT,BHOPAL TO PROTECT IOC INTEREST.  02/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
 4  OC/670/1997  2020200432 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  253325  ER  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 22-APR-16 in favour of Party  TW NO. ER-62298 LOADED WITH HSD -23840 LTRS, BOOKED VIDE RR NO.897155 DT.29.4.95, FOUND EMPTY ON ARRIVAL AT DESTINATION. OPEN DELIVERY OBTAINED. JOINT DIP CERTIFICATE MADE AND RECORDED SHORTAGE. SHORTAGE CLAIM PREFERRED ON E.RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/HNM/ER/L/ 15/95-96 DT.21.9.95.E.RLY ACKNOWLEDGED THE CLAIM WITH LETTER REF.NO. F1/70245/11/95. MANY REMINDERS SENT VIDE LETTER DATED 5.9.96, 4.2.97, 7.11.97, 19.5.98, 2.7.99, 27.9.99. NO RESPONSE RECEIVED FROM E.RLY. THEN FINALLY SUIT WAS FILED IN RCT, BHOPAL TO PROTECT IOC INTEREST.  02/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
 5  OC/434/2002  2020201435 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  439782  ER  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 10-DEC-12 in favour of Party  TW NOS. WR-966843, WR-966729, WR-90072 LOADED VIDE RR NO. 245327 DT.25-26/10/99 REPORTED AT DESTINATION WITH SEALS MISSING. OPEN DELIVERY SOUGHT FROM STATION MASTER VIDE LETTER DATED 27/10/99. STATION MASTER REFUSED TO GIVE OPEN DELIVERY ON PLEA THAT, JOINT CHECKING AT BUDGE BUDGE WAS DONE ON 23.10.99 BEFORE BY DEPARTURE. SHORTAGE OBSERVED WAS 20426 LTRS, 19346 LTRS, 6077 LTRS RESPECTIVELY. TOTAL SHORTAGE RECORDED WAS 45849 LTRS. CLAIM PREFERRED WITH E.RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/ER/L/35/99-2000 DT.29.03.2000.E.RLY ACKNOWLEDGED RECEIPT OF CLAIM VIDE LETTER REF.NO. F2/ER/5934/4/00/R03 DT.17.04.2000. E.RLY REPUDIATED CLAIM VIDE LETTER DATED 02.08.2000. FINALLY SUIT WAS FILED WITH RCT,BHOPAL.  02/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
 6  OC/432/2002  2020201436 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  534080  ER  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 13-OCT-15 in favour of Party  TW NOS. NR-108289A, NR-108288A, NR-108287A, NR-108284A LOADED VIDE RR NO. 245317 DT.22.10.99, REPORTED AT DESTINATION WITH SHORTAGE. SHORTAGE/S OBSERVED AS 13640 LTRS, 14520 LTRS, 14810 LTRS, 12710 LTRS RESPECTIVELY. TOTAL SHORTAGE ¿ 55680 LTRS. CLAIM PREFERRED WITH E.RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/ER/L/32/99-200 DT.28.03.2000. CCM, E.RLY ACKNOWLEDGED RECEIPT OF CLAIM VIDE LETTER REF.NO. F2/ER/5908/4/00/R03 DT. 17.04.2000.FURTHER NO COMMUNICATION FROM E.RLY RECEIVED. FINALLY THEN SUIT WAS FILED IN RCT, BHOPAL IN 2002.  02/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
 7  OC/938/2003  2020301710 IBP CO LIMITED  309830  ER  RCT/CCC  THE CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION LODGED WITH RAILWAYS AS WELL AS BEFORE RCT WITHIN TIME. IT IS A CASE OF INTERCEPTION BY RCD & SETTLEMENT SOUGHT AS PER RLY BD CIR. HENCE IOC¿S CLAIM IS JUSTIFIED.  30/Jul/2010      No  No  No  No
 8  OA/127/2005  2020500263 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  354044  ER  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 13-OCT-15 in favour of Party  TW NO. WR-41088 CONTAINING HSD, BOOKED VIDE RR NO. 338483 DATED 30.04.2002 NOT RECEIVED AT LOCATION. NDC CLAIM WAS PREFERRED VIDE LETTER REFERENCE NO. SD/ER/E/01/2002-03 DATED 24.09.2002. CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BY E.RLY. HENCE SUIT FILED IN RCT, BHOPAL IN 2005. ABOVE SAID TW WAS THEN RECEIVED AT LOCATION ON 11.10.2005 IN OPEN CONDITION WITHOUT SEAL. TW WAS THEN UNLOADED WITH OPEN DELIVERY. IN JOINT DIPPING FOUND SHORTAGE OF 5039 LTRS.SHORTAGE CLAIM WAS THEN PREFERRED BY CONVERTING NDC CLAIM TO SHORTAGE VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/ER/L/05/2005-06 DATED 10.11.2005. E.RLY VIDE THEIR LETTER REF.NO. F2/10209707/10/02/RECON (L) DATED 05.01.2006 INFORMED THAT, SAID TW DELIVERED TO LOCATION, HENECE NDC CLAIM DOES NOT ARISE. THEN CLAIM PREFERRED IN RCT HAVE BEEN CONVERTED TO SHORTAGE CLAIM AND REVISED CLAIM FROM RS.354044/- TO RS.73608/-  02/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
 9  OA/128/2005  2020500264 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  276955  ER  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 13-OCT-15 in favour of Party  TW NO. ER-97426 LOADED WITH HSD BOOKED VIDE RR NO. B/338432 DT.30.04.2002 RECEIVED AT LOCATION ON 25.9.2002 AND TOP SEALS IN BROKEN CONDITION AND BOTTOM SEALS WERE MISSING. HENCE ASKED FOR JOINT DIPPING. IN JOINT DIPPING FOUND SHORTAGE OF 19.017 KL.CLAIM WAS PREFERRED WITH CCO, E.RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/ER/L/04/2002-03 DT.01/10/2002. E.RLY. DID NOT SEND ANY LETTER OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AS WELL REPUDIATION. HENCE FINALLY SUIT FILED IN RCT, BHOPAL TO PROTECT IOC, INTEREST.  02/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
 10  OA/123/2006  2020600178 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  782944  ER  RCT/CCC  CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION WERE LODGED WITH RAILWAYS WELL IN TIME. CONSTANT FOLLOW UP WAS MADE WITH RAILWAYS TO MAINTAIN GOOD COMMERCIAL RELATION . HENCE CASE WAS FILED BEFORE RCT WITH A CONDONATION OF LIMITATION.  02/Aug/2010      No  No  No  No
 11  OC/84/2002  2010200122 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  209911  CR  Case Settled by RCT BOMBAY on 25-APR-14 in favour of Party  BPC DESPATCHED 23720 LITRES OF HSD UNDER RR NO. 382817 DT.3/7/6/99 BY TW NO.ER 35230 LDD EX PANEWADI TO BHITONI. THE CONSIGNMENT WAS RECEIVED BY CR AT RAILWAY RISK.THE TW WAS NOT RECEIVED AT DESTINATION HENCE CLAIM FOR NON-DELIVERY VIDE LETTER NO. W.LOG.FRT.2.HSD 99-00/102 DATED 14.9.99 WAS PREFERRED ON CCO,CRLY MUMBAI FOR RS. 209911.00 ALONG WITH NON-DELIVERY CERITIFICATE ISSUED BY RAILWAYS AT BHITONI.THEREAFTER CCO VIDE LETTER NO. CL/POL/412/BHTN/10/2000 JBP DATED 27.3.00 INFORMED BPC THAT THE SUBJECT TW WAS RECEIVED AT DESTINATION WITHIN NORMAL TRANSIT TIME BUT FOUND EMPTY AT DESTINATION AND SO CLAIM IS NOT ADMISSIBLE. BPC PROTESTED TO RAILWAYS VIDE LETTER DT.14.8.01 AGAINST THE REPUDIATION ON THE GROUNDS THAT AS PER THE PLACEMENT MEMO GIVEN TO RLYS AT PANEWADI 71 TWS INCLUDING SUBJECT TW WERE PLACED FOR LOADING. THE RELEASE MEMO GIVEN BY PANEWADI INSTALLATION CONFIRMS THAT OUT OF T HE 71 TWS PLACED 68 TWS WERE LOADED AND 2 TWS BEARING NOS. CR 44974 AND ER 61961 WERE DEFECTIVE AND ONE TW NR 73937 WAS OUT OF POSITION, WHICH PROVES THAT THE TW.ER 35230 WAS LOADED AND DESPATCHED TO BHITONI. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.209911.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  08/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 12  OA/551/1994  2010300801 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  63791  CR  HC/JBP   TW.NO. ER 60634 LOADED WITH 23840 LITRES OF HSD AND DESPATCHED EX BAJUWA TO GWALIOR UNDER RR NO. 190952 ON 29.8.91 WAS RECEIVED AT DESTINATION WITH DEFECTIVE MASTER VALVE AND BOTH SEALS MISSING AND SHORTAE OF 2654 LITRES.BPC THEREFORE LODGED A CLAIM FOR THE SAID SHORTAGE VIDE LETTER NO. AD.B.FRT.2.HSD 91-92/104 DT. 7.2.92 FOR RS.12199.00 ON CCO,CRLY. MUMBAI C.S.T. CCO VIDE LETTER NO. CF/JHS/4458/GWL/3/92 HV 4 DATED 29.12.92 REPUDIATED BPCS CLAIM ON THE GROUNDS THAT LOADING WAS NOT SUPERVISED BY RAILWAYS AND SAID TO CONTAIN RR WAS ISSUED HENCE CLAIM IS NOT ADMISSIBLE.WE PROTESTED VIDE OUR LETTER DATED 3.2.93 ON THE GROUNDS THAT THAT RAILWAYS WERE FREE TO SUPERVISE THE LOADING AND FAILURE ON PART OF THE RAILWAYS TO VERIFY/SUPERVISE THE LOADING CANNOT BE THE GROUNDS OF REJECTION OF THE CLAIM.ALSO SECTINON 93 OF THE INDIAN RAILWAYS ACT, 1989 STATES THAT THE RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION SHALL NOT BE RELIEVED OF ITS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LOSS, DESTRUCTION, DAMAGE,DETERIORATION OR NON-DELIVERY UNLESS THE RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION PROVES THAT IS HAS USED REASONABLE FORESIGHT AND CARE IN THE CARRIAGE OF GOODS. SINCE THE SAID TW WAS RECEIVED AT DESTINATION WITH TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS MISSING IT CLEARLY PROVES INTERFERENCE TO THE TANWKAGON WHILE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE RAILWAYS.SINCE THE CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BPC FILED APPLICATION IN THE RCT. SUSEQUENTLY ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR RCT BHOPAL VIDE LTR RCT/BPL/SUITORS MONEY/133 DATED 1.3.2000 ADVISED PO,RCT BHOPAL THAT CHEQUE NO. 870032 DATED 25.2.2000 FOR RS.20,680.00 DRAWN IN FAVOR OF ADDL.REG.RCT BHOPAL WAS RECEIVED IN COMPLIANCE OF THE ORDER SHEET PASSED BY HIGH COURT JABALPUR ON 7.1.2000 WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.20,680.00 IMMEDIATELY.  09/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 13  OA/35/1996  2010300802 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  18738  CR  Case Settled by HC HIGH COURT NAGPUR on 16-JAN-12 in favour of Party  TW.NO. ER 35302 LOADED WITH 26900 LITRES OF MS AND DESPATCHED EX BAJUWA TO KHAPRI ON BPC ACCOUNT WAS UNDELIVERED. SO BPC PREFERRED CLAIM ON CCO,CRLY. MUMBAI C.S.T FOR NON-DELIVERY VIDE LETTER NO. AD.B.FRT.2.MS 92-93/98 DT. 25.2.93 FOR RS.404239.00SUBESEQUENTLY THE TW WAS RECEIVED AT DESTINATION VIZ KHAPRI WITHOUT TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS AND SHORTAGE OF 1247 LITRES. BPC THEREFORE AMENDED THE NON-DELIVERY CLAIM TO SHORT-RECEIPT VIDE LETTER DATED 12.4.93 FOR RS. 18738.00 BASED ON THE SHORTAGE/JOINT DIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED.RAILWAYS REPUDIATED OUR CLAIM FOR SHORTAGE VIDE LETTER DATED 13.6.95 ON THE GROUNDS THAT LOADING WAS NOT SUPERVISED BY RAILWAY STAFF AND SAID TO CONTAIN RR WAS ISSUED AND HENCE CLAIM IS NOT ADMISSIBLE.WE PROTESTED VIDE OUR LETTER DATED 10.09.96 ON THE GROUNDS THAT RAILWAYS WERE FREE TO SUPERVISE THE LOADING AND FAILURE ON PART OF THE RAILWAYS TO VERIFY/SUPERVISE THE LOADING CANNOT BE THE GROUNDS OF REJECTION OF THE CLAIM.ALSO SECTINON 93 OF THE INDIAN RAILWAYS ACT, 1989 STATES THAT THE RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION SHALL NOT BE RELIEVED OF ITS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LOSS, DESTRUCTION, DAMAGE,DETERIORATION OR NON-DELIVERY UNLESS THE RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION PROVES THAT IS HAS USED REASONABLE FORESIGHT AND CARE IN THE CARRIAGE OF GOODS. SINCE THE SAID TW WAS RECEIVED AT DESTINATION WITH TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS MISSING IT CLEARLY PROVES INTERFERENCE TO THE TANWKAGON WHILE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE RAILWAYS.SINCE THE CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BPC FILED APPLICATION IN THE RCT. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.18738..00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION  09/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 14  OA/214/2002  2010400284 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  320660  CR  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 13-JUN-16 in favour of Party  CLAIM FOR MISSING TW NO. SR-35594, BOOKED VIDE RR NO.382036 DT.10/11.5.99, PREFERRED WITH CENTRAL RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/CR/E/213/99-2000 DT.26.10.99. CENTRAL RLY ACKNOWLEDGED CLAIM VIDE LETTER REF.NO. JHS/POL/457/DEHRI/ET/1/2000.C. RLY VIDE LETTER DATED 08/11/2000 INFORMED THAT, TW WAS REPORTED SICK AT BHUSAWAL, HENCE DETACHED AND TANKWAGON SEND BACK TO PANEWADI AFTER REPAIR ALONG WITH EMPTY TANKWAGON. SUBSEQUENTLY IT WAS BOOKED FOR BPCL, TADALI UNDER DIFFERENT RR. THEREFORE MATTER MAY BE SETTLED WITH BPCL. ACCORDINGLY MATTER WAS TAKEN UP WITH BPCL,PANEWADI, BUT BPCL PANEWADI DENIED OF THIS TANKWAGON RECEIVED IN LOADED CONDITION. THEREFORE JC COULD NOT BE SIGNED. ACCORDINGLY, MATTER WAS FURTHER TAKEN UP WITH CCO, CENTRAL RLY TO SETTLE THE CLAIM. ON NON-SETTLEMENT OF CLAIM, SUIT WAS FILED IN RCT,BHOPAL.  03/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
 15  OC/60/2004  2010400507 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  221712  CR  RCT/BB   TW.NO. CR 46368 LDD WITH 25890 LITRES OF ATF (AVIATION TURBINE FUEL) EX BRSG TO RAIRU UNDER RR.NO. 347270 DATED 26/27.09.01 WAS DELIVERED AFTER A DELAY OF MORE THAN 3 MONTHS AND HAD TO BE NECESSARILY DOWNGRADED TO KEROSENE AS PER QUALITY CONTROL GUIDELINES.WE THEREFORE LODGED A CLAIM ON CCO.CRLY MUMBAI C.S.T FOR SHORTAGE OF 981 LITRES INCURRED IN THE TW AMOUNTING TO RS.14095 AND LOSS DUE TO DOWNGRADATION OF PRODUCT FROM ATF WHICH IS A HIGHER GRADE PRODUCT TO SKO AMOUNTING TO RS.207617.00 VIDE OUR LETTER NO.. NO. W.LOG.FRT.2.ATF 2001-02/19 DATED 20.02.2002.THEREAFTER BPC SUBMITTED THE RATE FOR ATF AND SKO AS REQUESTED BY RAILWAYS.INSPITE OF SUBMITTING ALL THE DOCUMENTS OUR CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BY RAILWAYS AND HENCE APPLICATION FILED AGAINST RAILWAYS. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.221712.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  08/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 16  OC/61/2004  2010400508 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  216613  CR  RCT/BB  AVIATION TURBINE FUEL (ATF) IS A HIGHLY QUALITY CONTROL PRODUCT AND HENCE QUALITY OF THE PRODUCT HAS TO BE MAINTAINED. AN INDENT FOR LOADING ATF IS PLACED BY BPC SPECIFYING THAT THE TWS SHOULE BE PREVIOUSLY LOADED WITH EITHER SKO OR NAPTHA.ACCORDING RAILWAYS PROVIDE ONLY SUCH WAGONS FOR LOADING ATF TO ENSURE THAT THE QUALITY OF ATF IS MAINTAINED. LIKEWISE TW.NO. WR 44805 WAS LDD WITH 25030 LITRES EX BRSG TO RAIRU UNDER RR.NO. 346649 DATED 2/3/8.01 AND FREIGHT ALSO PAID FOR ATF. AS THE TW WAS NOT DELIVERED, CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT WAS PREFERRED ON CCO,C.RLY.MUMBAI C.S.T VIDE BPCS LETTER NO. W.LOG.FRT.2.ATF 2001-02/16 DATED 22.10.01 FOR `.362777.00 SUBSEQUENTLY THE TW WAS DELIVERED BY RAILWAYS AND DECANTED BY BPC RAIRU ON 21.1.02. SINCE THE TW WAS DECANTED AFTER A GAP OF THREE MONTHS, IT HAD TO BE NECESSARILY DOWNGRADED AND DECANTED AS KEROSENE AS PER QUALITY CONTROL GUIDELINES. SINCE ATF WAS DESPATCHED IN THE TW AND SKO WAS DECANTED,BPC AMENDED THE NON-DELIVERY CLAIM TO LOSS DUE TO DOWNGRADATION FROM ATF TO SKO `.203555.00 AND SHORTAGE LOSS OF 901 LITRES FOR `.13058.00 TOTAL AMOUNT ` .216613.00.THEREAFTER BPC SUBMITTED THE RATE FOR ATF AND SKO AS REQUESTED BY RAILWAYS.INSPITE OF SUBMITTING ALL THE DOCUMENTS OUR CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BY RAILWAYS AND HENCE APPLICATION FILED AGAINST RAILWAYS WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.216613.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  22/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 17  OC/62/2004  2010400510 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  203682  CR  RCT/BB  TW.NO. CR 102037 LDD WITH 25270 LITRES OF ATF (AVIATION TURBINE FUEL) EX BRSG TO RAIRU UNDER RR.NO. 346661 DATED 2/3/8.01 WAS NOT DELIVERED. SO CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT WAS PREFERRED ON CCO,C.RLY.MUMBAI C.S.T VIDE BPCS LETTER NO. W.LOG.FRT.2.ATF 2001-02/15 DATED 22.10.01 FOR RS.366278.00 SUBSEQUENTLY THE TW WAS DELIVERED BY RAILWAYS AND DECANTED BY BPC RAIRU ON 21.1.02. SINCE THE TW WAS DECANTED AFTER A GAP OF THREE MONTHS, IT HAD TO BE NECESSARILY DOWNGRADED AND DECANTED AS KEROSENE AS PER QUALITY CONTROL GUIDELINES. BPC THEREFORE AMENDED THE NON-DELIVERY CLAIM TO LOSS DUE TO DOWNGRADATION FROM ATF TO SKO RS.200827.00 AND SHORTAGE LOSS OF 197 LITRES FOR RS.2855.00 TOTAL AMOUNT RS.203682.00.THEREAFTER BPC SUBMITTED THE RATE FOR ATF AND SKO AS REQUESTED BY RAILWAYS.INSPITE OF SUBMITTING ALL THE DOCUMENTS OUR CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BY RAILWAYS AND HENCE APPLICATION FILED AGAINST RAILWAYS. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.203682.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  08/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 18  OA/246/2005  2010500065 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  209829  CR  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 06-APR-16 in favour of Party  CLAIM FOR SHORTAGE OF 14.324 KL IN TW NO. NR-95679 ( 12364 LTRS) AND SE-96734 (1960 LTRS) WHICH WERE BOOKED VIDE RR NO.303944 DT.23.12.2001, PREFERRED WITH CENTRAL RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/CR/L/01 /2002-03 DT. 01.04.2002 FOR RS 209829/-. CENTRAL RAILWAY REGISTERED CLAIM UNDER REF.NO. CL/POL/P3/JHS /10301897/01/2003-04. AFTER LOT OF FOLLOW UP BY IOC, CCO, CENTRAL RLY RESPONDED VIDE LETTER DATED 30.08.2004 AND REPUDIATED CLAIM , STATING THAT, LOADING WAS NOT SUPERVISED BY RAILWAY STAFF.AN APPEAL WAS MADE VIDE LETTER DATED 4.10.2004, STATING FACT THAT, TANK WAGON WAS RECEIVED AT LOCATION IN TAMPERED CONDITION. TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS WERE MISSING AND TOP MANHOLE COVER WAS FOUND IN OPEN CONDITION. THEN CLAIM WAS LODGED IN RCT, BHOPAL IN 2005 TO PROTECT IOC INTEREST AS CLAIM WAS GETTING SUIT BARRED. CENTRAL RAILWAY RESPONDED VIDE LETTER DATED 12.08.2005 AND COMMUNICATED THAT REPUDIATION STAND ON REASON STATED ABOVE.AGAIN AN APPEAL WAS MADE VIDE LETTER DATED 23.08.2005 AND 13.06.2008 AND REQUESTED TO CONSIDER CLAIM FOR SETTLEMENT CITING PARA 4( C ) OF THE RAILWAY BOARD CIRCULAR DATED 24.12.90, IT STATES THAT WHEN TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS ARE FOUND MISSING AND MAN HOLE COVER ALSO OPEN, BUT NO EVIDENCE OF LEAKAGE, IT SHOWS THERE HAS BEEN INTERFERENCE AND THUS LIABILITY OF RAILWAY CAN NOT BE DENIED. IN ABOVE CASE TANK WAGONS WERE RECEIVED IN MANHOLE COVER OPEN CONDITION AND SEALS MISSING. TILL DATE RCT, BHOPAL NOT DELIVERED JUDGMENT.  25/Mar/2011      No  No  No  No
 19  OA/123/2006  2010600063 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  0  CR  Case Settled by RCT CALCUTTA on 16-SEP-08 in favour of Party  JUST DUPLICATION OF CASE NO. 2020600178 WHICH IS PENDING UNDER EASTERN RAILWAY.  30/Jul/2010      No  No  No  No
 20  OC/4/2006  2010600085 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  218352  CR  RCT/BB  TWNO. WR 42292 LOADED WITH 24970 LITRES OF ATF EX BRSG TO RAIRU WAS NOT DELIVERED.SO CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT BEARING REF. W.LOG.FRT.2.ATF 03-04/7 DT. 12.01.2004 FOR RS.404954.00 WAS PREFERRED ON CCO,CRLY.,MUMBAI.C.S.T. SUBSEUENTLY THE TW WAS DELIVERED BY RAILWAYS AND DECANTED BY BPC RAIRU ON 18.12.03. SINCE THE TW WAS DECANTED AFTER A GAP OF THREE MONTHS, IT HAD TO BE NECESSARILY DOWNGRADED AND DECANTED AS KEROSENE AS PER QUALITY CONTROL GUIDELINES. BPC THEREFORE AMENDED THE NON-DELIVERY CLAIM TO LOSS DUE TO DOWNGRADATION FROM ATF TO SKO RS.215027.00 AND SHORTAGE OF 204 LITRES FOR RS.3325.00 TOTAL CLAIM AMOUNT RS.218352.00 INSPITE OF SUBMITTING ALL THE DOCUMENTS OUR CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BY RAILWAYS AND HENCE APPLICATION FILED AGAINST RAILWAYS. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.218352.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  09/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 21  OC/3/2006  2010600086 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  216043  CR  RCT/BB  TWNO. ER 62253 LOADED WITH 25090 LITRES OF ATF EX BRSG TO RAIRU WAS NOT DELIVERED.SO CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT BEARING REF. W.LOG.FRT.2.ATF 03-04/6 DT. 5.1.2004 FOR RS.408919.00 WAS PREFERRED ON CCO,CRLY.,MUMBAI.C.S.T. SUBSEUENTLY THE TW WAS DELIVERED BY RAILWAYS AND DECANTED BY BPC RAIRU ON 18.12.03. SINCE THE TW WAS DECANTED AFTER A GAP OF THREE MONTHS, IT HAD TO BE NECESSARILY DOWNGRADED AND DECANTED AS KEROSENE AS PER QUALITY CONTROL GUIDELINES. BPC THEREFORE AMENDED THE NON-DELIVERY CLAIM TO LOSS DUE TO DOWNGRADATION FROM ATF TO SKO RS.216043.00 INSPITE OF SUBMITTING ALL THE DOCUMENTS OUR CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BY RAILWAYS AND HENCE APPLICATION FILED AGAINST RAILWAYS. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.216043.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  08/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 22  OA/24/2008  2010800035 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  19898  CR  Case Settled by RCT BOMBAY on 07-DEC-11 in favour of Party  BPC DESPATCHED 24190 LITRES OF HSD UNDER RR NO. 721902 DT. 31.5.2005 BY TW NO. NR 79180 EX PANEWADI TO BORKHEDI. THE CONSIGNMENT WAS ACCEPTED BY CR AT RAILWAY RISK.THE SAID TW WAS RECEIVED AT BORKHEDI WITH SHELL JOINT CRACK NEAR SIDE ANGLE AND SHORTAGE OF 860 LTRS WAS INCURRED.WE THEREFORE LODGED CLAIM FOR SHORT RECEIPT VIDE OUR LETTER W.LOG.FRT.2.HSD 2005-06/1 DT.30.8.2005 ON CCO,CRLY,MUMBAI C.S.T.AMOUNTING TO RS.19898.00 AS REQUESTED BY RAILWAYS THE RATE CERTIFICATE WAS FORWARDED TO RLY VIDE LETTER DT.24.4.06.HOWEVER RAILWAYS VIDE LTR DT.5.9.2006 INFORMED US THAT THE TW WAS INADMISSIBLE AS THE LOADING WAS NOT SUPERVISED BY RAILWAY STAFF AND SAID TO CONTAIN RR ISSUED.WE PROTESTED TO RLYS VID OUR LETTER DATED 15.9.2006 AGAINST THE DECISION OF REPUDIATION ON THE GROUNDS THAT RAILWAYS WERE FREE TO VERIFY PHYSICALLY THE QUANTITY LOADED AND FAILURE ON BEHALF OF THE RAILWAYS CANNOT BE GROUNDS FOR REJECTION OF OUR CLAIM .ALSO UNDER SECTION 93 OF THE INDIAN RAILWAYS ACT 1989 THE RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION SHALL NOT BE RELEIVED OF ITS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LOSS, DESTRUCTION,DAMAGE,DETERIORATION OR NON DELIVERY AND UNLESS RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION PROVES THAT IS HAS USED REASONABLE FREIGHT AND CARE IN THE CARRIAGE OF GOODS.SINCE THE TW REACHED DESTINATION WITH SHELL FO TW LEAKY IT PROVES THAT RAILWAYS HAD PLACED A DEFECTIVE TANKWAGON FOR LOADING AND ENOUGH CARE WAS NOT TAKEN AND THEREFORE RAILWAYS ARE LIABLE TO SETTLE THE CLAIM. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.19898.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  08/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 23  OA/11/2009  2010900037 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  97800  CR  Case Settled by RCT NAGPUR on 14-JUL-15 in favour of Party  CLAIM FOR SHORTAGE OF 2.615 KL IN TW NO. WR-956606 WHICH WAS BOOKED VIDE RR NO.0112534 DT.11.12.2006, PREFERRED WITH CENTRAL RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/CR/L/01 /2007-08 DT. 26.04.2007 FOR ` 97800/-. CENTRAL RAILWAY REGISTERED CLAIM UNDER REF.NO. Y/POL/POL1/KRI/CSTM/1010700137/05/2007-08. CCO, CENTRAL RLY REPUDIATED CLAIM VIDE LETTER DATED 07.04.2008, STATING THAT, LOADING WAS NOT SUPERVISED BY RAILWAY STAFF & LOADED DIRECTLY IN YOUR SIDING ON SAID TO CONTAIN RR BASIS.AN APPEAL WAS MADE VIDE LETTER DATED 15.04.2008, STATING FACT THAT, TANK WAGON WAS RECEIVED AT LOCATION IN TAMPERED CONDITION. TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS WERE MISSING AND LEFT SIDE DUMMY WAS LEAKING. ALSO POINTED OUT , AS PER RAILWAY BOARD CIRCULAR DATED 24.12.90,WHEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS ARE FOUND MISSING AND THE TANK WAGON IS FOUND LEAKING, THEN IN SUCH CASE THERE IS NO REASON FOR REPUDIATING THE CLAIM. CCO, CENTRAL RLY RESPONDED VIDE LETTER DATED 06.06.2008 AND INFORMED THAT, CLAIM IS REPUDIATED STATING REASONS OF LETTER DATED 07.04.2008. HENCE, FINALLY SUIT WAS FILED IN RCT, NAGPUR 2009 TILL DATE RCT, NAGPUR NOT YET DELIVERED JUDGMENT.  25/Mar/2011      No  No  No  No
 24  OA/455/1993  2011000012 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  141025  CR  Case Settled by RCT BOMBAY on 10-SEP-98 in favour of Party  CLAIM LODGED FOR NON-RECEIPT OF TANKWAGON NO. SE28612 LDD WITH 25890 LITRES EX BAJUWA TO GWALIOR VIDE LETTER ATF 90-91/60 DATED 12.12.90.RAILWAYS VIDE LETTER CF.JHS.4440.GWL.1.91 HV4 DATED 10.7.91 INFORMED US THAT THECONTENTS OF THE SUBJECT TW. NO. SE 28612 WAS TRANSHIPPED INTO TW. NO. WR 44158 AT JHANSI ON 13.10.90 AND DECANTED AT GWALIOR BY IOC ON 27.10.90 AND MATTER TO BE ADJUSTED WITH IOC.IOC PAID US THE COST OF 25160 LITRES OF SKO DECANTED BY THEM FROM THE TRANSHIPPED TW.NO.WR 44158..WE THEREFORE VIDE OUR LETTER DATED 18.1.93 AMENDED OUR ND CLAIM TO LOSS DUE TO DOWNGRADATION AND SHORTAGE OF 2150 LITRES AMOUNTING TO RS.98228.00.SINCE THE CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED WE FILED IN RCT BHOPAL.OUR CLAIM IS JUSTIFIED AS WE HAD DESPATCHED 25890 LITRES OF ATF VIDE TW.SE 28612 AND RAILWAYS HAD NOT TAKEN ENOUGH CARE AS CARRIERS AND SO THE TW WAS TRANSHIPPED INTO WR 44158 AND MISDESPATCHED TO IOC. WE THEREFORE KINDLY REQUEST YOU TO GRANT US COMPENSATION OF RS. 98228 BEING THE COMPENSATION ALONG WITH INTEREST @18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF SUIT TILL REALISATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION FILE IN RCT.  23/Feb/2011      No  No  No  No
 25  OA/2329/1988  2011000013 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  82172  CR  RCT/BB  THE SUBJECT TANKWAGON NO WR 36315 WAS LOADED ON 19.6.86 EX BRSG TO SATNA WITH 23600 LITRES OF HSD .THE CONSIGNMENT WAS SENT AND ACCEPTED BY THE CENTRAL RAILWAY AT RAILWAY RISK AND RAILWAY RECEIPT ISSUED.SINCE THE WAGON WAS NOT DELIVERED AT DESTINATION WE PREFERRED A CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT ON CENTRAL RAILWAY AND REQUESTED FOR COMPENSATION.RAILWAYS VIDE LETTER DATED 17.6.87 ADVISED US THAT THE WAGONS HAD MET WITH AN ACCIDENT BETWEEN KASARA AND IGATPURI ON 21.6.86. SINCE IT IS RAILWAYS RESPONSIBLITY AS CARRIERS TO DELIVER THE GOODS AT THE DESTINATION WE REQUEST YOU TO KINDLY GRANT THE COMPENSATION OF RS.82172/- BEING THE COMPENSAION OF THE HIGH SPEED DIESEL ALONG WITH INTEREST @18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF SUIT TILL REALISATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION FILED IN HONOURABLE HIGH COURT.  12/Oct/2010      No  No  No  No
 26  OA/43/1998  2011000016 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  18745  CR  HC/JBP  CLAIM LODGED ON CCO,C.RLY., NO. HSD 95-95/24 DATED 14.6.95 FOR NON-RECEIPT OF TW.NO.ER 61736 LDD WITH 24200 LITRES OF HSD EX BAJUWA TO SATNA AMOUNTING TO RS.175549/-.RAILWAYS VIDE LETTER NO. CF/JBP/129/STA/9/96 DATED 12.11.97 ADVISED US THAT THE TW. WAS DECANTED AT SURAT BY IOC AS UNCONNECTED.IOC ADJUSTED THE MATTER WITH US FOR THE DECANTED QUANTITY AND WE AMENDED OUR NON-RECEIPT CLAIM TO SHORTAGE OF 2587 LITRES AMOUNTING TO RS. 18745.00 VIDE LETTER DATED 13.1.98. SINCE THE CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED WE FILED AN APPLICATION IN THE RCT BHOPAL. AS PER JUDGEMENT ORDERS PASSED ON 29.9.99 THE CASE WAS DECREED IN FAVOUR OF BPC BUT WE ARE STILL TO RECEIVE THE PAYMENT.WE THEREFORE KINDLY REQUEST YOU TO GRANT US COMPENSATION OF RS.18745.00 BEING THE COMPENSATION ALONG WITH INTEREST @18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF SUIT TILL REALISATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION FILE IN RCT.  23/Feb/2011      No  No  No  No
 27  OA/501/1992  2011000017 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  90309  CR  Case Settled by RCT AHMEDABAD on 10-SEP-98 in favour of Party  CLAIM LODGED ON CR ON 14.9.89 FOR NON-RECEIPT OF 25630 LITRES OF ATF LDD IN TW.NO.CR 43341 EX BAJUWA TO GWALIOR .RLYS VIDE LETTER DATED 5.12.90 INFORMED US THAT SUBJECT TANKWAGON WAS DECANTED BY IOC AT SUBEDARGANJ AS UNCONNECTED ON 19.5.89,CONTENTS BEING SKO 25130 LITRES. ACCORDINGLY NON-RECEIPT CLAIM WAS AMENDED VIDE LETTER DT. 30.7.91 TO SHORTAGE OF 1400 LITRES AND LOSS DUE TO DOWNGRADATION OF ATF TO SKO AMOUNTING TO RS.90309.00 SINCE OUR CLAIM WAS NOT SETTED APPLICATION FILED IN RCT.OUR CLAIM IS JUSTIFIED AS WE HAD LOADED THE TANKWAGON TO GWALIOR AND ALSO PAID FREIGHT UPTO GWALIOR BUT FOR REASONS BEST KNOWN TO RAILAYS, WAS MISDESPATCHED TO SUBEDARGANJ AND DECANTED BY IOC AS UNCONNECTED AND SKO.HENCE A LOSS DUE TO DOWNGRADATION FROM ATF WHICH IS A HIGHER GRADE PRODUCT TO SKO WAS SUFFERED ALONG WITH SHORT RECEIPT OF 1400 LITRES. WE THEREFORE KINDLY REQUEST YOU TO GRANT US COMPENSATION OF RS. 90309 BEING THE COMPENSATION ALONG WITH INTEREST @18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF SUIT TILL REALISATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION FILE IN RCT.  23/Feb/2011      No  No  No  No
 28  OA/2/2003  2011000020 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  202784  CR  HC/MBI  TW NO. ER 60881 LOADED WITH 25120 LITRES OF SKO WAS DESPATCHED EX PANEWADI TO BADNERA UNDER RR.NO. 441557 ON 14.3.2000. SINCE THE TW WAS NOT RECEIVED AT DESTINATION, WE PREFERRED A CLAIM FOR THE NON-RECEIPT VIDE OUR LETTER NO. W.LOG.FRT.2.SKO 2000-01/23 DATED 19.6.00 FOR RS.202784.00 ON CCO,CRLY MUMBAI C.S.T. CCO VIDE LETTER CL/POL/P4/2214/BD/06/2001-BSL DATED 14/17/5/01 ADVISED US THAT THE TW WAS DELIVERED AT DESTINATION WITHIN NORMAL TRANSIT TIME BUT FOUND EMPTY.SINCE THE LOADING WAS NOT SUPERVISED BY RAILWAY STAFF AND SAID TO CONTAIN RR WAS ISSUED THE CLAIM IS NOT ADMISSIBLE.WE PROTESTED TO RAILWAYS VIDE OUR LETTER DATED 4.1.02 ON THE GROUNDS THAT RAILWAY AUTHORITIES AT PANEWADI WERE AT LIBERTY TO WITNESS/SUPERVISE THE LOADING OF THE TANKWAGON AND ISSUE CLEAR RR. THE SUBJECT TANKWAGON WAS CORRECTLY LOADED AS PER THE PLACEMENT MEMO AND THE LOADING CHART. INSPITE OF SUBMITTING ALL THE DOCUMENTS OUR CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BY RAILWAYS AND HENCE APPLICATION FILED AGAINST RAILWAYS. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.202784.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  09/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 29  TA/66/1993  2011000022 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  77870  CR  Case Settled by RCT AHMEDABAD on 22-JUL-98 in favour of Party  CLAIM FOR SHORTAGE OF 16.614 KL IN TW NO. ER-97457(TRANSSHIPPED EX.TW NO. SE-96347) WHICH WAS BOOKED VIDE RR NO.385442 DT.3.9.1985, PREFERRED WITH CENTRAL RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/ASK/CR/L/148/85-86 DT. 22.01.1986 FOR RS 55619/-. CENTRAL RAILWAY DID NOT RESPONDED EVEN AFTER SENDING SEVERAL REMINDERS. FINALLY CLAIM WAS LODGED IN RCT, AHMEDABAD IN 1993 AFTER SENDING DUE NOTICES. IN 1999, AS PER DIRECTIVES OF MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS AN APPEAL LETTER DATED 29.07.1999, FOR OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT SENT TO CCO, WESTERN RAILWAY IN RESPONSE TO THEIR ADVISE LETTER DATED 08.01.99. RAILWAY NOT SETTLED CLAIM TILL DATE.TILL DATE RCT, BHOPAL HAS NOT DELIVERED JUDGMENT.  25/Mar/2011      No  No  No  No
 30  OR/370/2006  2050600507 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  88076  NF  RCT/GHY  THIS IS A SIMPLE CASE OF REFUND OF EXCESS FREIGHT PAID BY US THROUGH DD. ONE CONSIGNMENT OF LDO CONSISTING OF 47 BTPN TANK WAGONS WERE SENT FROM BRPL (BONGAIGON) TO BPCL, BGB ON 11.05.2004. FREIGHT FOR THE ABOVE CONSIGNMENT WAS CHARGED FOR RS. 30,61,924/- BY RLY THOUGH BUT BPCL HAD PAID RS 31,50,000/- UNDER DD NO. 024577 DT. 8.5.2004 DRAWN ON STATE BANK OF SAURASTRA IN ADVANCE FOR WHICH WE WERE BOUND TO PAY SOME EXCESS AMOUNT. THE CLAIM ARISES DUE TO THIS DIFFERENCE OF RS. 88,076/- AND WE HAVE SUBMITTED ALL THE DOCUMENTS ALONG WITH CLAIM REQUEST TO CCM OFFICE AT N.F.RLY. A LONG PERIOD HAS SINCE BEEN PASSED BUT WE NEVER RECEIVED A SINGLE REPLY FROM CLAIMS OFFICE, N.F.RLY AND AS PER RLY GUIDELINES WE HAD TO APPEAR BEFORE RCT TO MAINTAIN TIME BINDING. WE ARE YET TO RECEIVE ANY JUDGEMENT FROM RCT.  29/Jun/2010      No  No  No  No
 31  OC/429/2000  2070300073 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  237520  SE  RCT/BPL  CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT OF TW.NO. NF 90460 LOADED WITH 66960 LITRES EX VIZAG TO BHILAI ON BPC ACCOUNT WAS PREFERRED ON CCO,SERLY CALCUTTA VIDE OUR LETTER NO. WR.FRT.4 MS 97-98/13 DATED 7.5.98.SUBSEQUENTLY THE CONTENTS OF TW.NO. NF 90460 WERE TRANSHIPPED INTO TW NO. CR 168 AND THE SAID TW WAS RECEIVED AT BHILAI WITHOUT SEALS. SO VIDE OUR LETTER DATED 15.6.98 OUR EARLIER CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT WAS AMENDED TO SHORTAGE LOSS OF 11261 LITRES AMOUNTING TO RS.237520.00, BASED ON THE SHORTAGE/DIP MEASUREMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY BHILAI RAILWAY AUTHORITIES.THE SHORTAGE CLAIM WAS REPUDIATED BY CCO VIDE LETTER NO. WL/POL/CJ/VZP/BIA-1272/DKS/6/98 DATED 2.3.00.WE STRONGLY PROTESTED TO RAILWAYS VIDE OUR LETTER DATED 11.5.2000 THAT OUR CLAIM IS JUSTIFIED AS THE LOSS IS DUE TO THE TRANSHIPMENT OF THE PRODUCT FROM TW.NO. NF 90460 TO CR 168. THE TRANSHIPMENT WAS CARRIED OUT BY RAILWAYS AS THE ORIGINAL TW NF 90460 WAS SICK ENROUTE WHILE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE RAILWAYS. RAILWAYS AS CARRIERS ARE BOUND TO DELIVER THE GOODS IN THE SAME CONDITION AND RAILWAYS ARE LIABLE FOR LOSS DUE TO ANY INTERFERENCE TO THE WAGON WHILE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE RAILWAYS.THE TRANSHIPMENT OF THE TW WAS CARRIED OUT BY RAILWAYS ONLY AND BPC WAS NEITHER INFORMED NOT CALLED FOR THE TRANSHIPMENT PROCESS.MOREEVER THE TRANSHIPPED TW CR 168 WAS RECEIVED AT DESTINATION WITHOUT TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS. HENCE THE HEAVY LOSS INCURRED IN THE TW IS BECAUSE RAILWAYS HAD NOT TAKEN ENOUGH CARE WHICH UNDER THE LAW THEY WERE BOUND OR OBLIGED TO TAKE AND THEREFORE RAILWAYS ARE LIABLE TO SETTLE OUR CLAIM. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.237520.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  20/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 32  OC/141/2001  2070300095 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  56083  SE  Case Settled by RCT BHOPAL on 27-OCT-08 in favour of Party  CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT OF TW NO. WR 956656 LOADED WITH 65160 LITRES OF HSD EX VIZAG TO BHILAI WAS PREFERRED ON CCO,SERLY CALCUTTA VIDE OUR LETTER NO. WR.FRT.4.HSD 98-99/10 DATED 18.11.98 FOR RS.609772.00 SUBSEQUENTLY THE CONTENTS OF TW.NO. WR 956656 WERE TRANSHIPPED INTO TW NO. WR 966838 AND THE TRANSHIPPED TW WAS RECEIVED AT BHILAI . SO VIDE OUR LETTER DATED 18.12.98 OUR EARLIER CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT WAS AMENDED TO SHORTAGE LOSS OF 5993 LITRES AMOUNTING TO RS.56083.00, BASED ON THE SHORTAGE/DIP MEASUREMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY BHILAI RAILWAY AUTHORITIES. THE TRANSHIPMENT WAS CARRIED OUT BY RAILWAYS AS THE ORIGINAL TW WR 956656 WAS SICK ENROUTE WHILE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE RAILWAYS. RAILWAYS AS CARRIERS ARE BOUND TO DELIVER THE GOODS IN THE SAME CONDITION AND RAILWAYS ARE LIABLE FOR LOSS DUE TO ANY INTERFERENCE TO THE WAGON WHILE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE RAILWAYS.THE TRANSHIPMENT OF THE TW WAS CARRIED OUT BY RAILWAYS ONLY AND BPC WAS NEITHER INFORMED NOT CALLED FOR THE TRANSHIPMENT PROCESS. HENCE THE HEAVY LOSS INCURRED IN THE TW IS BECAUSE RAILWAYS HAD NOT TAKEN ENOUGH CARE WHICH UNDER THE LAW THEY WERE BOUND OR OBLIGED TO TAKE AND THEREFORE RAILWAYS ARE LIABLE TO SETTLE OUR CLAIM. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.56083.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  21/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 33  OC/247/2001  2070300121 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  2806884  SE  RCT/BPL  CLOSED  25/Mar/2011      No  No  No  No
 34  OC/249/2001  2070300123 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  3316265  SE  RCT/BPL  INITIALLY CLAIM FOR 37 MISSING TANKWAGONS WERE PREFERRED VIDE LETTER REF. NO. SD/GD/SER/E /39/98-99 DT.4.12.1998 DUE TO RAKE BOOKED VIDE RR NO. 477282 DT.28.11.98 WAS DERAILED AT DUNDI NEAR JABALPUR. SUBSEQUENTLY 30 TANKWAGONS WERE RECEIVED AT LOCATION. BUT 7 TANKWAGONS NOS.SE 77011, CR 49680, CR 46620, SC 29250, CR 100260, WR 40957, CR 49702 WERE REMAINED STRANDED AT DUNDI AND REPORTED PRODUCT LOSS. HENCE CLAIM WAS REVISED TO RS.2438431/- ON 28.2.2000. LOT OF REMINDERS SENT, BUT CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED BY SE RLY. THEREFORE FINALLY SUIT WAS FILED IN RCT,BHOPAL IN 2001. IN 2005, SE RLY OFFERED FOR OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT FOR RS.18,10,322/-. THIS WAS REJECTED BY IOC DUE TO IT WAS NOT MEETING TO THE ACTUAL VALUE OF PRODUCT LOSS.TILL DATE RCT,BHOPAL NOT DELIVERED JUDGMENT.  25/Mar/2011      No  No  No  No
 35  OC/12/2001  2070300365 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  3261806.97  SE  RCT/SC  THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS AS PART OF ITS SERVICES HAS BEEN TRANSPORTING COAL FROM MAHANADI COAL FIELDS LIMITED, TALCHER (ORISSA) TO THE APPLICANT RINL AT ITS VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT SIDING AT VISAKHAPATNAM. THAT THE RESPONDENT HAS COLLECTED EXCESS FREIGHT BY WAY OF OVERLOADING PENALTY FOR THE COAL TRANSPORTED DURING THE MONTH OF MAY, JUNE AND JULY 1998. THE RESPONDENT HAS COLLECTED A SUM OF RS.9,01,662/-FOR THE MONTH OF MAY 1998, RS.8,40,278/- FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE 1998, AND RS.5,72,030/-FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 1998, TOWARDS OVERLOADING PENALTY. THE TOTAL EXCESS FREIGHT COLLECTED BY WAY OF OVERLOADING PENALTY DURING THE ABOVE MENTIONED PERIOD IS RS.23,13,970/-. THE APPLICANT HAS FILED THE RELEVANT BILLS AND THE RAILWAY RECEIPTS RELATING TO THE SAID PERIOD. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE TARIFFS AND THE CIRCULARS OF THE RAILWAYS NORMAL FREIGHT CHARGES ARE TO BE COLLECTED FOR THE QUANTITIES UP TO CARRYING CAPACITY PLUS 2 TONNES PLUS 2 TONNES FOR EACH WAGON. THE COAL WAS TRANSPORTED IN BOX N TYPE WAGON AND THE PERMISSIBLE CARRYING CAPACITY CCPLUS2 TONNES. THE APPLICANT VERIFIED WITH THE RESPONDENT ABOUT THE CHARGING OF OVER LOADING PENALTY AND WAS INFORMED BY THE GOODS SUPERVISOR JNC SIDING, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY VIDE LETTER DATED 27-8-1998 THAT THE OVERLOADING PENALTY WILL BE CHARGED WHEN THE LOAD EXCEEDS CC PLUS 2 TONNES PLUS 2 TONNES. IT IS APPARENT FROM THE BILLS AND THE RAILWAY RECEIPTS THAT THE RESPONDENT HAS CHARGED OVER LOADING PENALTY WHERE THE LOAD EXCEEDED CC PLUS 2 TONNES. IT IS ALSO PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE RESPONDENT AS A MATTER OF RULE CHARGES NORMAL FREIGHT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT CCPLUS2 TONNES IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT THAT THE LOAD IS LESS THAN CC PLUS 2 TONNES. THE RESPONDENT BY ITS CIRCULAR NO.WCJ/O/G/98/11 DATED 5.3.98 HAS INFORMED ITS LOADING STATIONS THAT THE PERMISSIBLE CARRYING CAPACITY IN CASE OF BOX “N” TYPE WAGONS IS CARRYING CAPACITY PLUS 2 TONNES. THE RESPONDENT FURTHER BY ITS CIRCULAR NO.RA.47/1005/VDATED.03.05.1995 HAS ALSO INFORMED ITS LOADING STATIONS THAT OVERLOADING PENALTY HAS TO BE CHARGED IN CASE OF 8 WHEELED WAGON WHEN THE LOAD IS MORE THAN THE PERMISSIBLE CARRYING CAPACITY PLUS 2 TONNES. THEREFORE, THE RESPONDENT IS ENTITLED TO CHARGE OVER LOADING PENALTY ONLY WHEN THE LOAD IS MORE THAN CC PLUS 2 TONNES PLUS 2 TONNES. IT IS APPARENT FROM THE BILLS AND RAILWAY RECEIPTS THAT THE RESPONDENT HAS COLLECTED OVER LOADING PENALTY FOR THE LOAD OVER AND ABOVE CC PLUS 2 TONNES ITSELF WHICH IS ILLEGAL IMPROPER AND CONTRARY TO CIRCULARS ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AND HENCE TO BE REFUNDED TO THE APPLICANT WITH INTEREST AT 18 PERCENT P.A UP TO DATE OF REALIZATION. THE CLAIM NOTICES DATED 7-10-98, 14-10-98 AND 20-10-98 AND REVISED CLAIM NOTICES DATED 11-11-98 ARE ISSUED BY THE APPLICANT WITHIN SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF FREIGHT CHARGES. THE PAYMENT FOR THE EARLIEST BILL IN DISPUTE RELATING TO THE MONTH OF MAY 1998 WAS MADE ON 11-6-98. THEREFORE THE CLAIM NOTICES AND THE PRESENT APPLICATION ARE ISSUED AND FILLED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION.  20/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 36  OC/220/2002  2070301045 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  1430328  SE  RCT/BPL  CLAIM FOR 6 MISSING TW NOS. ER-98327, ER-61538, ER-93540, NR-73703, ER-60948, CR-46977 , BOOKED VIDE RR NO.931150 DT.24.5.99, PREFERRED WITH SE RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/SER/E/11/99-2000 DT.16.6.99. THESE TANKWAGONS WERE MET WITH AN ACCIDENT NEAR LANGIGARH, DIST. SAMBALPUR. CLAIM REGISTERED BY SE RLY VIDE REF. NO. WL/POL/CS/VZP/BSP/ 175/ SD/6/99. LOT OF REMINDERS SENT, BUT SE RLY DID NOT RESPONDED AND SETTLE THE CLAIM TILL 2002. HENCE FINALLY SUIT WAS FILED IN RCT, BHOPAL.SE RLY INFORMED TO PO RCT,BHOPAL VIDE LETTER DATED 15.10.2008 THAT, INSTANT CASE WAS MATCH ADJUSTED WITH RAILWAY DUES, HOWEVER APPLICANT DID NOT AGREE FOR SUCH ADJUSTMENT.. IOC REPLIED TO THIS LETTER VIDE LETTER DATED 18.11.2008 THAT, PROPOSAL SHALL BE ACCEPTED SUBJECT TO RAILWAY GIVE DETAILS OF PARENTAGE OF UNCONNECTED TANKWAGONS. TILL DATE RCT,BHOPAL NOT DELIVERED JUDGMENT  25/Mar/2011      No  No  No  No
 37  OC/323/2002  2070301053 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  244343  SE  RCT/BPL  CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT OF TW NO. SE28904 LOADED WITH 25130 LITRES OF SKO EX VIZAG TO BILASPURI WAS PREFERRED ON CCO,SERLY CALCUTTA VIDE OUR LETTER NO. WR.FRT.4.SKO 99-00/5 DATED 9.9.99 FOR RS.244343.00 SINCE THE CLAIM WAS NOT SETTLED WE FILED APPLICATION IN THE RCT BHOPAL AGAINST SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY. WE THEREFORE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF RS.244343.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION.  21/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 38  OC/11/2002  2070301146 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  1283968  SE  RCT/SC  1. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS AS PART OF ITS SERVICE HAS BEEN TRANSPORTING IRON ORE FROM KIRANDUL TO THE APPLICANT RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT, VSP SIDING AT VISAKHAPATNAM. THE RESPONDENT HAS CHARGED AND COLLECTED OVER LADING PENALTY CHARGES OF RS.9,20,630.00 APPLYING FREIGHT RATE ON HIGHER QUANTITY THAN THE QUANTITY ACTUALLY TRANSPORTED. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT VIDE R.R.NO.068133 DATED 24.8.1999, M/S NMDC HAD DISPATCHED VIDE RAKE NO. NO.KVF-56/87 DATED 24.08.1999 CONSISTING OF 56 WAGONS OF IRON ORE TO BE DELIVERED TO THE APPLICANT AT VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT SIDING. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT THE SAID RAKE HAD ARRIVED AT ITS FINAL DESTINATION ON 26-08-1999. 2. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT CERTAIN RAILWAYS OFFICIALS ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE MADE A CHECK IN RESPECT OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED RAKE OF THE SUBJECT CONSIGNMENT AND HAVE ALLEGED TO HAVE WEIGHED THE RAKE ON AN IN MOTION WEIGH BRIDGE OF THE APPLICANT WITHIN THE APPLICANT’S PLANT PREMISES WHICH IS NOT MEANT FOR ANY COMMERCIAL TRANSACTION EITHER FOR PAYMENT OF MATERIAL COST OR FREIGHT. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE SUBJECT CONSIGNMENT OF IRON ORE ARRIVED AT ITS FINAL DESTINATION AT A PEAK MONSOON SESSION WHEREIN THE WAGONS HAD COLLECTED WATER ON ACCOUNT OF HEAVY RAIN EN-ROUTE. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE SAID IN MOTION WEIGH BRIDGE HAD BEEN INSTALLED AT VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT ONLY FOR INDICATIVE READINGS AND NOT FOR COMMERCIAL TRANSACTION AND HAS NOT BEEN CERTIFIED BY THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES DEPT. OF GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE ALLEGED EXCESS WEIGHT OF THE SUBJECT CONSIGNMENT WAS NOT WITNESSED/CERTIFIED BY THE OFFICIALS OF THE APPLICANT COMPANY, AND WAS A UNILATERAL ACT OF THE PART OF THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS. 3. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT ALTHOUGH THE CONSIGNMENT ARRIVED AT ITS FINAL DESTINATION ON 26.08.1999, THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS VIDE THEIR BILL NO. 118/SE/OFB/2000/68 DATED 20.05.2000 DEMANDED AN AMOUNT OF RS.9,20,639.00 TOWARDS OVERLOADING CHARGES AND PENALTY, AS PER THE WEIGHMENT TAKEN UNILATERALLY ON IN-MOTION WEIGH BRIDGE LOCATED IN APPLICANT’S PREMISES AND DEMANDED PAYMENT OF THE SAME. APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS WERE REQUIRED TO RAISE BILLS AS PER THE ‘WEIGHT ONLY’ AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE APPLICANT ANT AND RESPONDENT. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD RAISED A MISCELLANEOUS BILL IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE TERMS OF THE ABOVE AGREEMENT, DEMANDING PAYMENT OF A SUM OF RS.9,20,639.00 WHICH WAS STRONGLY OBJECTED TO BY THE APPLICANT TO THE RESPONDENT RAILWAY BY THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (RAW MATERIALS) VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT OF THIS APPLICANT AND ADDRESSED A LETTER TO THE FA&CAO, S.E. RAILWAY, KOLKATA VIDE HIS FAX DATED 7-6-2000. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE SAID PENALTY AMOUNT WAS PAID UNDER PROTEST SINCE NON-PAYMENT OF THE SAME WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS LEVYING THE PENALTY OF 10/15% OF INVOICE VALUE AS PER THE TERMS OF THE WEIGHT ONLY AGREEMENT. 4. REPEATED REMINDER WERE SENT BY THE APPLICANT TO THE RESPONDENT WITH STRONG PROTEST REGARDING COLLECTION OF THE PENALTY AMOUNT AND HAD REQUESTED REFUND OF OVERLOADING PENALTY, COLLECTED FROM THE APPLICANT UNILATERALLY. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS. 5. THE RESPONDENT APART FROM REFUNDING THE EXCESS FREIGHT CHARGES IS ALSO LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST FOR THE DELAY IN REFUNDING THE CLAIM AMOUNT. THE CLAIM OF INTEREST IS VALID, LEGAL AND REASONABLE. THE APPLICANT AS SUCH IS ALSO CLAIMING INTEREST AT THE RATE 18 PERCENT PER ANNUM ON THE CLAIM AMOUNT FROM 09.06.2000 TO TILL DATE OF REALIZATION OF THIS CLAIM AMOUNT.  20/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 39  OA/431/2006  2070700204 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  102805  SE  Case Settled by RCT CALCUTTA on 26-FEB-08 in favour of Party  WAGON NO. CR 49638 (HSD) BOOKED FROM HALDIA TO RANCHI ON 22.05.04 WAS ARRIVED DESTINATION ON 21.09.2004 I.E. AFTER A LONG PERIOD OF 4 MONTHS WHERE THE NORMAL TRANSIT PERIOD IS 2 DAYS ONLY. WAGON ARRIVED DESTINATION WITHOUT TOP AND BOTTOM SEALS, AND WE APPEALED FOR JOINT CHECKING BUT RLY. DID NOT RESPOND. AS THE WAGON COULD NOT BE STRANDED ON THE SIDING FOR INDEFINITE PERIOD, AS PER INDUSTRY NORMS, JOINT CHECKING WAS CARRIED OUT WITH OIL INDUSTRY MEMBER (IOC) AND FOUND A SHORTAGE OF 5419 LITRES HSD. PRODUCT WAS BOOKED UNDER ¿RLY RISK¿ RATE AS PER RR COPY. MISSING SEALS AND ABNORMAL TRANSIT PERIOD PROVES GROSS NEGLIGENCE ON THE PART OF RLY. MOREOVER, RLY CANNOT DENY THEIR LIABILITY ON THE GROUND OF SWA (SENDER¿S WEIGHT ACCEPTED) REMARKS IN RR, WHEN BPCL ALSO BORNE ENTIRE EXPENSES (INCLUDING SALARY) OF RAILWAY¿S 3 STAFF AT HALDIA. THE LOADING CHART (CTCC CHART) PRODUCED BY BPCL IS NOT THEIR OWN COMPUTERIZED DOCUMENT BUT IT IS THE DOCUMENT PREPARED ON THE BASIS OF CALIBRATION DATA JOINTLY INSPECTED BY RLY / TANK WAGON MANUFACTURING COMPANY / OIL COMPANY REPRESENTATIVES. BPCL DO THIS JOB AS A COORDINATOR ON ALL INDIA BASIS WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY NOMINATED BY RAILWAYS AND OTHER OIL INDUSTRY MEMBERS. THE FIRST COPY OF THESE CHARTS ALWAYS IS SENT TO THE GENERAL SECRETARY, INDIAN RAILWAY CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION (IRCA), NEW DELHI. THE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY IS THE CHAIRMAN OF CTCC WHO IS ALSO AN OFFICIAL IN M/S. BPCL.  29/Jun/2010      No  No  No  No
 40  OA/266/2004  2070700718 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORP LTD  240326  SE  RCT/BPL  BPC DISPATCHED 21500 LITRES OF FO VIDE RR.NO.709997 DT. 10.7.02 BY TW NO. ER 14696 EX BRSG TO BHILAI.THE CONSIGNMENT WAS ACCEPTED BY SE RLY AT RAILWAYS RISK.SINCE THE CONSIGNMENT WAS NOT RECEIVED AT DESTINATION BPC FILED CLAIM FOR NON-RECEIPT VIDE LETTER NO.WR.LOG.FRT.4.FO 2000-01/1 S DATED 25.1.02 ON CCO,SERLY.,CALCUTTA FOR ` 240326.00 BEING THE COST OF 21500 LITRS OF FO NOT DELIVERED AT DESTINATION.SUBSEQUENTLY VIDE OUR REMINDERS DATED 15.4.02,19.8.02 AND 19.9.02 BPC REQUESTED CCO, SERLY., KOLKATA TO TRACE THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE WAGON AND ARRANGE TO PLACE THE SAME AT THE SIDING.HOWEVER, CCO VIDE LETTER DATED WL/POL/CJ-BRSG/BIA-4/AKR/02/02 DATED 23.8.02 ADVISED BPC THAT THE CLAIM WAS NOT RECEIVED WITHIN 6 MONTHS FROM DATE OF BOOKING AND HENCE CANNOT BE ENTERTAINED.BPC VIDE LETTER DATED 16.12.02 ONCE AGAIN REQUESTED TO TRACE THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE WAGON AND ARRANGE TO PLACE THE SAME AT THE APPLICANTS SIDING OR ARRANGE SETTLEMENT.SINCE NOT REPLY WAS FORTHCOMING FROM CCO,SERLY KOLKATA, BPC VIDE LETTER DATED 27.5.03 REQUESTED GM,SERLY, KOLKATA TO ENTERTAIN OUR CLAIM ON THE GROUNDS THAT 1) IN THE SAID CASE BPC NEITHER RECEIVED ANY INTIMATION NOR ANY PAPERS FROM THEIR LOCATION ABOUT THE NON-RECEIPT AND WERE UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE WAGON HAD BEEN RECEIVED BY LOCATION.ON FINDING THAT THE WAGON WAS NOT DELIVERED, BPC TOOK IMMEDIATE STEPS TO OBTAIN THE NON-DELIVERY CERTIFICATE( ISSUED ON 16.1.02) AND FILE CLAIM ON CCOA ON 25.1.02.BPC BEING PLATINUM CUSTOMERS OF RAILWAYS ARE REGULAR USER OF RAILWAY SERVICES CONTRIBUTING CRORES OF RUPEES TO RAILWAYS BY WAY OF FREIGHT.THE DELAYOF 11 DAYS HAD OCCASIONED ENTIRELY DUE TO CONSTRAINTS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF BPC AND UNDER UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES.THE NON-DELIVERY CERTIFICATE IF PROOF OF THE WAGON NOT BEING DELIVERED AT DESTINATION. RAILWAYS AS CARRIERS HAD COLLECTED FREIGHT FOR DELIVERING THE WAGON TO THE DESTINATION AND WERE DUTY BOUND TO DELIVER THE GOODS AT THE DESTINATION. SINCE RAILWAYS HAVE FAILED IN THERE DUTY TO TRACE THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE WAGON AND DELIVER AT THE DESTINATION, WE PRAY THAT THE RAILWAYS BE ORDERED AND DECREED TO PAY BPC THE SUM OF ` 240326.00 AND THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION TILL THE DATE OF ORDER AND THEREAFTER AT THE SAME RATE TILL THE PAYMENT IS MADE AND COST OF APPLICATION  22/Jun/2011      No  No  No  No
 41  OA/23/2005  2070701104 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  144374  SE  RCT/SC  1. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS AS PART OF ITS SERVICE HAS BEEN TRANSPORTING WASHED COAL FROM KATHARA TO THE APPLICANT RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT, VSP SIDING AT VISAKHAPATNAM. THE RESPONDENT HAS CHARGED AND COLLECTED EXCESS FREIGHT OF RS.1,55,438.00. THE APPLICANT SUBMIT THAT THE RESPONDENT HAS CHARGED FREIGHT AT WAGONLOAD RATE INSTEAD OF TRAINLOAD RATE FOR 2 RAKES SUPPLIED DURING MAY, 2002 AND THEREBY COLLECTED EXCESS FREIGHT DURING MAY 2002. THE RESPONDENT CHARGED FREIGHT ON WAGONLOAD BASIS INSTEAD OF TRAINLOAD BASIS BECAUSE OF LESS NUMBER OF WAGONS IN 2 (TWO) RAKES SUPPLIED BY IT. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT SOME OF THE WAGONS SUPPLIED FOR THESE RAKES WERE DEFECTIVE, SICK AND UNSUITABLE. THE UNSUITABILITY OF THE WAGONS WAS ALSO ENDORSED BY THE CONCERNED RAILWAY STAFF. THE RESPONDENT FAILED TO SEE THAT THE SAID LAPSE WAS ATTRIBUTABLE TO IT AND NOT TO THE APPLICANT. 2. APPLICANT STATES AND SUBMITS THAT RAILWAYS COULD NOT SUPPLY SUFFICIENT NO. OF FIT WAGONS, DUE TO WHICH APPLICANT WAS PENALIZED AND THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD CHARGED THE APPLICANT WAGON LOAD RATE INSTEAD OF TRAIN LOAD RATE. APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD THEMSELVES CERTIFIED THAT CERTAIN WAGONS WHICH WERE SUPPLIED TO THE APPLICANT WERE UNSUITABLE AND VIDE CIRCULAR DATED 7.8.1998 THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD ISSUED A CIRCULAR WHEREIN THEY HAD CLEARLY STATED AS FOLLOWS: “IN CASE WHEREVER THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF WAGONS QUALIFYING FOR TRAIN LOAD RATE BENEFIT ARE NOT SUPPLIED BY THE RAILWAYS AGAINST TRAIN LOAD INDENT DUE TO SHORTAGE OF WAGONS, THE RAIL USERS SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED. IN THIS REGARD, BOARD’S INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN PARA 4 OF LETTER NO.TCR/1017/96/17 DATED 27.6.1997 NOTIFIED VIDE PARA (4) OF THIS OFFICER LETTER NO.RA.41/RATES/1A/G/PT.V/CONT.2 DATED 9.7.1997 (SL. NO.73(G)/97) SHALL BE FOLLOWED.” 3. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMIT THAT THE AREA MANAGER, SE RAILWAY TALCHER HAD ADDRESSED A LETTER TO THE SENIOR DOM , KHURDA RAOD, RECOMMENDING THAT THE APPLICANT BE CHARGED ‘TRAIN LOAD FACILITY’ AND THE AREA MANAGER SE RAILWAY, BOKARO STEEL CITY HAD ALSO RECOMMENDED FREIGHT TO BE CHARGED AT ‘TRAIN LOAD FACILITY’ BUT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS DID NOT COMPLY WITH. THE APPLICANT LODGED ITS CLAIMS ON THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS VIDE CLAIM NOTICE DATED 26.07.2002 AND ADDRESSED TO THE FA & CAO (WST), SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS VIDE BILL NO.650/SE/CFB/2002/309, DATED 07.09.2002 REFUNDED AN AMOUNT OF RS.58,777/- OUT OF ORIGINAL CLAIM OF RS.1,55,436.00 THERE BY LEAVING BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.96,659.00 UNSETTLED AND REFUSED TO SETTLE WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASON. 4. THE RESPONDENT APART FROM REFUNDING THE EXCESS FREIGHT CHARGES IS ALSO LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST FOR THE DELAY IN REFUNDING THE CLAIM AMOUNT. THE CLAIM OF INTEREST IS VALID, LEGAL AND REASONABLE. THE APPLICANT AS SUCH IS ALSO CLAIMING INTEREST AT THE RATE 18 PERCENT PER ANNUM ON THE PENDING CLAIM AMOUNT FROM THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF EXCESS FREIGHT UP TO THE DATE OF REALIZATION OF THIS CLAIM AMOUNT.  21/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 42  OA/24/2005  2070701107 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  36733  SE  RCT/SC   1. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS AS PART OF ITS SERVICE HAS BEEN TRANSPORTING IRON ORE FROM KIRANDUL TO THE APPLICANT RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT, VSP SIDING AT VISAKHAPATNAM. THE RESPONDENT HAS CHARGED AND COLLECTED EXCESS FREIGHT OF RS.25,803.00 APPLYING FREIGHT RATE ON HIGHER QUANTITY THAN TRANSPORTED. 2. THE APPLICANT VIDE CLAIM NOTICE DATED 14.09.2002 AND ADDRESSED TO FA & CAO (WST), SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA HAD LODGED THE CLAIM, WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME OF SIX MONTHS ON THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS, UNDER PROVISIONS SECTION 106 OF RAILWAYS ACT, 1989 ON THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS FOR THE EXCESS FREIGHT OF RS.1,53,021.00 (RS.1,27,218.00 FOR WRONG APPLICATION OF WAGON LOAD RATE INSTEAD OF TRAIN LOAD RATE AND RS.25803.00 FREIGHT RATE APPLIED ON HIGHER QUANTITY THAN TRANSPORTED) THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD COLLECTED ILLEGALLY AND WHICH WAS EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT THE SAID CLAIM NOTICE WAS PERSONALLY ACKNOWLEDGED BY RESPONDENT RAILWAYS ON 26.9.2002. 3. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS, THAT THEREAFTER THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS REFUNDED AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,27,218/- OUT OF ORIGINAL CLAIMS OF RS.1,53,021.00 VIDE BILL NO.118/SE/OFB/03/327 DATED 27.1.2003 COLLECTED TOWARDS WAGON LOAD RATE INSTEAD OF TRAIN LOAD RATE BUT DID NOT REFUND DIFFERENTIAL FREIGHT OF RS.25,803.00 WHICH WAS CHARGED ON HIGHER QUANTITY THAN TRANSPORTED BY THE RESPONDENT, WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY REASON. 4. IT IS TO PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE QUANTITY MENTIONED IN THE INVOICE AS CERTIFIED BY THE CHIEF GOODS SUPERINTENDENT AT KIRANDUL, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAYS IS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR CALCULATION OF RAILWAY FREIGHT CHARGEABLE AND PAYABLE BY THE APPLICANT. HOWEVER, IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE RESPONDENT CHARGED FREIGHT FOR 18488.30 TONS WHEREAS THE FREIGHT PAYABLE QUANTITY WAS 18430.10 TONS AS MENTIONED IN THE RESPECTIVE INVOICES AND HENCE THE CLAIM WAS LODGED FOR THE FREIGHT ELEMENT CHARGED ON EXCESS QUANTITY. 5. THE APPLICANT SENT A LETTER DATED 27.4.2005 AND ADDRESSED TO THE FA & CAO (WST), SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA AND REQUESTED THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS TO REFUND THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.25,803.00 BY WAY OF ADJUSTMENT IN THE “WIGHT ONLY” BILLS FORTHWITH. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS DID NOT REPLY. 6. THE RESPONDENT APART FROM REFUNDING THE EXCESS FREIGHT CHARGES IS ALSO LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST FOR THE DELAY IN REFUNDING THE CLAIM AMOUNT. THE CLAIM OF INTEREST IS VALID, LEGAL AND REASONABLE. THE APPLICANT AS SUCH IS ALSO CLAIMING INTEREST AT THE RATE 18 PERCENT PER ANNUM ON THE CLAIM AMOUNT FROM 27.01.2003 TO TILL DATE OF REALIZATION OF THIS CLAIM AMOUNT.  20/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 43  OA/1/2005  2070701110 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  48331  SE  RCT/SC  1. THE APPLICANT RINL SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD AGREED TO CARRY AND TRANSPORT COAL, TO THE APPLICANT FOR DELIVERY AT THE APPLICANT’S STEEL PLANT AT VISAKHAPATNAM. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD AGREED TO SUPPLY SUFFICIENT NO. OF WAGONS TO CARRY AND TRANSPORT GOODS VIZ., COAL ON A “TRAIN LOAD RATE” AND CHARGED THE APPLICANT “TRAIN LOAD RATE” I.E AT A CONCESSIONAL RATE. 2. APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT VIDE HIS FORWARDING NOTE NO. 120242 DT.4/1/2002 AND INVOICE NO.130 DT 4/1/2002, THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD AGREED TO CARRY A QUANTITY OF 3078.40 M.T OF COAL AT THE WAGON LOAD RATE OF RS 447.10/- PER M.T BUT CHARGED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 462.80 PER M.T AND LEVIED AN EXCESS AMOUNT OF RS 48,331/- TO THE APPLICANT. 3. THE APPLICANT FURTHER STATES AND SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS VIZ. THE AREA MANAGER, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY TALCHER HAD ISSUED A CERTIFICATE DATED 4/1/2002 FOR NON-SUPPLY OF FULL RAKE AND HAD CERTIFIED THAT VIDE RR NO.072181, THE RAILWAYS HAD CERTIFIED THAT SEVEN WAGONS WHICH WERE SUPPLIED BY THE RAILWAYS WERE DEFECTIVE AND NOT FIT FOR CARRYING SUBJECT CONSIGNMENT. 4. APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT VIDE THE CIRCULAR DT.7/8/1998 THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD ISSUED A CIRCULAR WHEREIN THEY HAD CLEARLY STATED AS FOLLOWS: “IN CASE WHEREVER THE MINIMUM NUMBERS OF WAGONS QUALIFYING FOR TRAIN LOAD RATE BENEFIT ARE NOT SUPPLIED BY THE RAILWAY AGAINST TRAIN LOAD INDENT DUE TO SHORTAGE OF WAGONS, THE RAIL USERS SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED. IN THIS REGARD, BOARD’S INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN PARA 4 OF LETTER NO.TCR/1017/96/17 DATED 27/6/1997 NOTIFIED VIDE PARA (4) OF THIS OFFICE LETTER NO.RA.41/RATES/1A/G/PT.V/CONT.2 DATED 9/7/1997 (SRL.NO,.73(G)/97) SHALL BE FOLLOWED”. 5. THE APPLICANT VIDE THE LETTER DATED 21/3/2002 AND ADDRESSED TO FA & CAO, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA HAD LODGED ITS CLAIM ON THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS FOR THE EXCESS FREIGHT OF RS.48,331/- THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD COLLECTED ILLEGALLY AND WHICH WAS EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT THE SAID CLAIM NOTICE WAS PERSONALLY ACKNOWLEDGED BY RESPONDENT RAILWAYS ON 1/4/2002. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS DID NOT REFUND THE EXCESS FREIGHT COLLECTED IN SPITE OF SEVERAL REMINDERS PREFERRED BY THE APPLICANT VIDE THEIR REMINDERS DT.15/11/2004, 8/12/2004 & 13/12/2004. 6 THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD NOT COMPLIED WITH THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CHIEF COMMERCIAL MANAGER (RATES) WHEREIN THEY HAD CLEARLY ADMITTED THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD NOT SUPPLIED ENOUGH FIT WAGONS WHICH WERE DULY CONFIRMED BY THE AREA MANAGER, TALCHER AND THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD CLEARLY DIRECTED ALL STATION MASTERS, GOODS CLERKS VIDE SPECIAL RATE CIRCULAR DT.7/8/1998. 7. APPLICANT RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS THAT THE LEVYING OF WAGON LOAD RATE BY THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS IS CONTRARY TO THEIR OWN RULES AND REGULATIONS AND ILLEGAL AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW IN FACT. APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THEY HAD LODGED THEIR CLAIM WITH THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS WITHIN TIME AS PER SECTION 17 OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987. 8. THEREFORE, THE RESPONDENT IS LIABLE TO PAY THE CLAIM FOR EXCESS FREIGHT AMOUNT OF RS 48,331/- WITH INTEREST AT 18 PERCENT P.A. UP TO THE DATE OF REALIZATION OF THE SAID CLAIM TO THE APPLICANT.  21/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 44  OA/20/2005  2070701111 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  265368  SE  RCT/SC  1. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS AS PART OF ITS SERVICE HAS BEEN TRANSPORTING COAL FROM KATHARA TO THE APPLICANT RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT, VSP SIDING AT VISAKHAPATNAM. THE RESPONDENT HAS CHARGED AND COLLECTED EXCESS FREIGHT OF RS. 1,72,317.00. THE APPLICANT SUBMIT THAT THE RESPONDENT HAS CHARGED FREIGHT AT WAGONLOAD RATE INSTEAD OF TRAINLOAD RATE FOR 2 RAKES SUPPLIED DURING MARCH, 2002 AND THEREBY COLLECTED EXCESS FREIGHT DURING MARCH 2002. THE RESPONDENT CHARGED FREIGHT ON WAGONLOAD BASIS INSTEAD OF TRAINLOAD BASIS BECAUSE OF LESS NUMBER OF WAGONS IN 2 (TWO) RAKES SUPPLIED BY IT. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT SOME OF THE WAGONS SUPPLIED FOR THESE RAKES WERE DEFECTIVE AND SICK. THE RESPONDENT FAILED TO SEE THAT THE SAID LAPSE WAS ATTRIBUTABLE TO IT AND NOT TO THE APPLICANT. THE SAID FACT WAS INTIMATED TO THE RESPONDENT AND ADDRESSED TO THE FA & CAO (WST), SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY (WALTAIR) BY THE APPLICANT VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 10.05.2002, WHICH WAS PERSONALLY ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS ON 24.05.2002. 2. APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT VIDE FORWARDING NOTE NO.024655 DATED 22.3.2002 AND INVOICE NO.00016 DATED 22.03.2002, TOGETHER WITH FORWARDING NOTE NO.066269 DATED 20.03.2002 AND INVOICE NO,00025 DATED 20.03.2002, THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD CARRIED AND TRANSPORTED QUANTITY OF 3337.20 MT 3149.20 MT OF COAL RESPECTIVELY. APPLICANT STATES AND SUBMITS THAT RAILWAYS COULD NOT SUPPLY SUFFICIENT NO. OF FIT WAGONS, DUE TO WHICH APPLICANT WAS PENALIZED AND THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD CHARGED THE APPLICANT WAGON LOAD RATE INSTEAD OF TRAIN LOAD RATE. APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD THEMSELVES CERTIFIED THAT CERTAIN WAGONS WHICH WERE SUPPLIED TO THE APPLICANT WERE DEFECTIVE, EG. WAGON SE 104877 WAS DEFECTIVE DUE TO “DOOR LOCK INEFFECTIVE”, WAGON NO.ER 41778 WAS DEFECTIVE DUE TO A “ BODY HOLE” AND WAGON NO.91863 WAS ALSO DEFECTIVE DUE TO “DOOR LOCK BEING DEFECTIVE” ETC., APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT VIDE CIRCULAR DATED 7.8.1998 THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD ISSUED A CIRCULAR WHEREIN THEY HAD CLEARLY STATED AS FOLLOWS: “IN CASE WHEREVER THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF WAGONS QUALIFYING FOR TRAIN LOAD RATE BENEFIT ARE NOT SUPPLIED BY THE RAILWAYS AGAINST TRAIN LOAD INDENT DUE TO SHORTAGE OF WAGONS, THE RAIL USERS SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED. IN THIS REGARD, BOARD’S INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN PARA 4 OF LETTER NO.TCR/1017/96/17 DATED 27.6.1997 NOTIFIED VIDE PARA (4) OF THIS OFFICER LETTER NO.RA.41/RATES/1A/G/PT.V/CONT.2 DATED 9.7.1997 (SL. NO.73(G)/97) SHALL BE FOLLOWED.” 3. THE APPLICANT LODGED ITS CLAIMS ON THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS VIDE CLAIM NOTICE DATED 10.05.2002, THE SAID CLAIM NOTICE WAS PERSONALLY ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS ON 24.5.2002. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS DID NOT REPLY. 4. THE RESPONDENT APART FROM REFUNDING THE EXCESS FREIGHT CHARGES IS ALSO LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST FOR THE DELAY IN REFUNDING THE CLAIM AMOUNT. THE CLAIM OF INTEREST IS VALID, LEGAL AND REASONABLE. THE APPLICANT AS SUCH IS ALSO CLAIMING INTEREST AT THE RATE 18 PERCENT PER ANNUM ON THE CLAIM AMOUNT FROM 20.03.2002 TO TILL DATE OF REALIZATION OF THIS CLAIM AMOUNT.  20/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 45  OA/21/2005  2070701112 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  93841  SE  RCT/SC  1. THE APPLICANT M/S RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LTD. VISAKHAPATANAM STEEL PLANT. VISAKHAPATNAM IS A GOVT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING, HAVING ITS STEEL PLANT AT VISAKHAPATNAM – 530 031. THE APPLICANT FOR THE PURPOSES OF TRANSPORTATION OF IRON ORE FROM KRDL TO VSPS, HAD UTILIZED THE SERVICES OF THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS, AND THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS AS THE CARRIER OF GOODS HAD AGREED TO CARRY THE IRON ORE FROM KRDL TO VSPS. THE PRESENT APPLICATION IS FILED IN RESPECT OF THE EXCESS FREIGHT COLLECTED BY THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS. 2. THE APPLICANT STATES AND SUBMITS THAT VIDE R.R. NO. 093234 DATED 30/1/2002, THE RAILWAYS HAD AGREED TO SUPPLY 56 WAGONS FOR TRANSPORTATION OF THE SUBJECT CONSIGNMENT FROM KRDL TO VSPS. APPLICANT FURTHER STATES AND SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS DID NOT SUPPLY 56 WAGONS BUT HAD SUPPLIED ONLY 55 WAGONS AND HAD ILLEGALLY CHARGED WAGON LOAD RATE INSTEAD OF TRAIN LOAD RATE TO THE APPLICANT. 3. APPLICANT FURTHER STATES AND SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE RAILWAY RECEIPT THAT ONE WAGON BEARING NO. 910050 WAS A SICK WAGON AND HENCE ONLY 55 WAGONS WERE LOADED. DUE TO THIS THE APPLICANT COULD NOT COMPLY WITH THE CONDITION STIPULATED BY THE RAILWAYS TO AVAIL TRAIN LOAD FACILITY. APPLICANT FURTHER STATES AND SUBMIT THAT VIDE CIRCULAR DATED 7TH AUGUST 1998, THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD ISSUED A CIRCULAR TO ALL STATION MASTERS AND SUPERINTENDENTS, GOOD CLERKS, SIDING CLERKS, WAY BRIDGE CLERKS ETC. WHEREIN THEY HAD CLEARLY INSTRUCTED THE FOLLOWING:- “IN CASE WHEREVER THE MINIMUM NUMBERS OF WAGONS QUALIFYING FOR TRAIN LOAD RATE BENEFIT ARE NOT SUPPLIED BY THE RAILWAY AGAINST TRAIN LOAD INDENT DUE TO SHORTAGE OF WAGONS, THE RAIL USERS SHOULD NOT BE PENALIZED. IN THIS REGARD, BOARD’S INSTRUCTIONS CONTAINED IN PARA 4 OF LETTER NO. TCR/1017/96/17 DATED 27/6/1997 NOTIFIED VIDE PARA (4) OF THIS OFFICE LETTER NO.RA.41/RATES/1A/G/PT.V/CONT.2 DATED 9/7/1997 (SRL NO.73 (G)/97) SHALL BE FOLLOWED.” 4. APPLICANT STATES AND SUBMITS THAT IN SPITE OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED CIRCULAR ISSUED TO THE CONCERNED CLERKS OF M/S SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY, THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD ILLEGALLY CHARGED WAGON LOAD RATE, INSTEAD OF TRAIN LOAD RATE, WHICH THE APPLICANT SUBMITS IS WHOLLY ILLEGAL AND AGAINST THE ABOVE MENTIONED CIRCULAR. 5. THE APPLICANT HAD VIDE ITS CLAIM NOTICE DATED 21/3/2002 AND ADDRESSED TO THE FA & CAO, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA HAD LODGED ITS CLAIM ON THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS 60,936/- TOGETHER ANOTHER AMOUNT OF RS.2227/- TOWARDS THE EXCESS FREIGHT THAT WAS ILLEGALLY COLLECTED BY THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS. THE SAID CLAIM NOTICE WAS PERSONALLY HANDED OVER TO THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS WHO HAD ACKNOWLEDGED THE SAME. THEREAFTER, REMINDER LETTERS DATED 15/11/2004, 8.12.2004, 13.12.2004 AND 4.1.2005 WERE SUBMITTED IN PERSON WHICH WERE ACKNOWLEDGED BY RAILWAYS BUT NEITHER THE CLAIM WAS SETTLED NOR ANY REPLY WAS GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT. 6. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS IS LIABLE TO REFUND THE EXCESS FREIGHT OF RS. 60936/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF FREIGHT CHARGES TILL DATE OF REALIZATION OF THIS CLAIM.  20/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 46  OA/20/2004  2070701142 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  226139  SE  RCT/SC  1. THE APPLICANT RINL SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD AGREED TO CARRY AND TRANSPORT COAL TO THE APPLICANT FOR DELIVERY AT APPLICANT’S STEEL PLANT AT VISAKHAPATNAM ON A “TRAIN LOAD FACILITY” AND CHARGE THE APPLICANT TRAIN LOAD RATE I.E., AT A CONCESSIONAL RATE. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS HAD ALSO AGREED TO SUPPLY SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF WAGONS TO THE APPLICANT TO AVAIL THE ABOVE BENEFIT. 2. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT VIDE THE FORWARDING NOTE NO.119737 DT.6.11.2001, THE RAILWAYS HAD AGREED TO TRANSPORT 2850.6 M.T OF COAL AT THE RATE OF RS.447.10 AS PER TRAIN LOAD RATE, BUT INSTEAD CHARGED RS.462.80 PAISE PER M.T THERE BY COLLECTING A FREIGHT OF RS.13,19,258 INSTEAD OF RS.12,74,503 THUS COLLECTING AN EXCESS AMOUNT RS.44,755. 3. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT VIDE THE FORWARDING NOTE NO.119927 DT.18/11/2001, THE RAILWAYS HAD AGREED TO TRANSPORT 3357.20 M.T. OF COAL AT THE RATE OF RE.447.10 AS PER TRAIN LOAD RATE, BUT INSTEAD CHARGED RS.462.80 PAISE PER M.T. THEREBY COLLECTING FREIGHT OF RS.15,53,713 INSTEAD OF RS.15,01,004 THUS COLLECTING AN EXCESS AMOUNT OF RS.52,709. 4. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT VIDE HE FORWARDING NOTE NO.119942 DT.28/11/2001, THE RAILWAYS HAD AGREED TO TRANSPORT 3374.60 M.T. OF COAL AT THE RATE OF RS.447.10 AS PER TRAIN LOAD RATE, BUT INSTEAD CHARGED RS.462.80 PAISE PER M.T THEREBY COLLECTING A FREIGHT OF RS.15,61,765 INSTEAD OF RS.15,08,784 THUS COLLECTING AN EXCESS AMOUNT OF RS.52,981. 5. APPLICANT FURTHER STATES AND SUBMITS THAT THE CLAIM NOTICE DT.9/1/2002 UNDER REFERENCE NO.VSP/FIN/FRT/01/CC-08/159 ENCLOSING THE ORIGINAL CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY THE AREA MANAGER, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY DULY CERTIFYING NON-SUPPLY OF FULL RAKE AND THAT THE WAGONS WHICH THE RAILWAYS HAD SUPPLIED BEARING WAGON NOS. ER 57452, ER 89527 AND ER 70643 WERE IN FACT BADLY DAMAGED AND UNSUITABLE FOR COAL LOADING, WAS PERSONALLY DELIVERED TO THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS WHO HAD DULY ACKNOWLEDGED RECEIPT OF THE SAME ON 18/1/2002. THE APPLICANT THEREAFTER SENT REMINDERS DATED 8/10/2004 AND 18/10/2004 TO THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS AND PAID SEVERAL PERSONAL VISITS ALSO BUT THE RAILWAYS NEITHER SETTLED THE CLAIM NOR REPLIED TO THE APPLICANT. 6. APPLICANT RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS THAT THE LEVYING OF WAGON LOAD RATE BY THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS IS CONTRARY TO THEIR OWN CIRCULAR DT.7/8/1998; RULES AND REGULATIONS AND ILLEGAL AND UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND IN FACT. APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT THEY HAD LODGED THEIR CLAIM WITH THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS WITHIN TIME AS PER SECTION 17 OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987. 7. THEREFORE, THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS IS LIABLE TO PAY THE CLAIM AMOUNT OF RS.1,50,455 WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF FREIGHT TILL DATE OF REALIZATION OF THIS CLAIM.  21/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 47  OA/22/2005  2071000019 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  86076  SE  RCT/SC   1. THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS AS PART OF ITS SERVICE HAS BEEN TRANSPORTING IRON ORE FROM KIRANDUL & BACHELI TO THE APPLICANT RASHTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT, VSP SIDING AT VISAKHAPATNAM. THE RESPONDENT HAS CHARGED AND COLLECTED EXCESS FREIGHT OF RS.55,894.00 APPLYING FREIGHT RATE ON HIGHER QUANTITY THAN TRANSPORTED. THE APPLICANT HAS FILED THE RELEVANT BILLS AND THE RAILWAY RECEIPTS RELATING TO THE SAID PERIOD. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE RESPONDENT SHALL RAISE BILLS BASED ON THE QUANTITY TRANSPORTED CONSIDERING CARRYING CAPACITY NORMS. 2. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT VIDE CLAIM NOTICE 26.07.2002 AND ADDRESSED TO THE FA & CAO (WST) SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY, GARDEN REACH, KOLKATA, WHICH WAS DULY ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE SAID OFFICE ON 07.08.2002, THE APPLICANT HAD INFORMED THE ABOVE MENTIONED RESPONDENT THAT THE RAILWAYS HAD COLLECTED AN EXCESS AMOUNT OF RS.55,894.00 (EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST) FROM THE APPLICANT AND SOUGHT AN EARLY REFUND OF THE SAID AMOUNT. THE APPLICANT HAD ENCLOSED THE RELEVANT BILLS AND RAILWAYS RECEIPTS AND SAID CLAIMS NOTICE WAS DULY ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS. APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS DID NOT REPLY. 3. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT DETAILS OF THE FORWARDING NOTES, INVOICE NOS. FREIGHT CHARGED, THE ACTUAL FREIGHT TO BE CHARGED AND THE EXCESS FREIGHT CHARGED BY THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS WERE FURNISHED BY THE APPLICANT DULY ENCLOSING COPIES OF BILLS AND RELEVANT RAILWAY RECEIPTS, THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS DID NOT REFUND THE EXCESS AMOUNT OF RS.55,894.00 TO THE APPLICANT.. 4. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THAT VIDE LETTER DATED 26.4.2005 AND ADDRESSED TO THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS, THE APPLICANT HAD REQUESTED THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS TO REFUND THE EXCESS FREIGHT COLLECTED BUT THERE WAS NO REPLY OR RESPONSE FROM THE RESPONDENT. THE SAID REMINDER DATED 26.4.2005 WAS SENT BY THE APPLICANT TO FA & CAO (WST), SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAYS, KOLKATA. THE APPLICANT FURTHER SUBMITS THAT IN SPITE OF LODGING ITS CLAIM UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 106 OF RAILWAYS ACT, 1989, THE RESPONDENT DID NOT SETTLED CLAIM OF THE APPLICANT NOR REPLIED, IN SPITE OF THE SAID CLAIM NOTICE BEING WITHIN THE STATUTORY PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS FROM THE RR DATE. THE APPLICANT HAD AGAIN SENT A REMINDER ON 26.4.2005 TO THE RESPONDENT RAILWAYS BUT THE SAID RESPONDENT DID NOT REPLY. 5. IT IS TO PERTINENT TO MENTION HERE THAT THE QUANTITY MENTIONED IN THE INVOICE AS CERTIFIED BY THE CHIEF GOODS SUPERINTENDENT AT KIRANDUL, SOUTH EASTERN RAILWAYS IS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR CALCULATION OF RAILWAY FREIGHT CHARGEABLE AND PAYABLE BY THE APPLICANT. HOWEVER, IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE RESPONDENT CHARGED FREIGHT FOR 33459.40 TONS WHEREAS THE FREIGHT PAYABLE QUANTITY WAS 33332.80 TONS AS MENTIONED IN THE RESPECTIVE INVOICES AND HENCE THE CLAIM WAS LODGED FOR THE FREIGHT ELEMENT CHARGED ON EXCESS QUANTITY. 6. THE RESPONDENT APART FROM REFUNDING THE EXCESS FREIGHT CHARGES IS ALSO LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST FOR THE DELAY IN REFUNDING THE CLAIM AMOUNT. THE CLAIM OF INTEREST IS VALID, LEGAL AND REASONABLE. THE APPLICANT AS SUCH IS ALSO CLAIMING INTEREST AT THE RATE 18 PERCENT PER ANNUM ON THE CLAIM AMOUNT FROM 07.05.2002 TO TILL DATE OF REALIZATION OF THIS CLAIM AMOUNT.  20/Sep/2013      Yes  Yes  No  No
 48  OR/21/1999  2081000016 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  39117  WR  SC/SCRT  THE MATERIAL DISPATCHED AGAINST THE SAID RAILWAY RECEIPT BOOKED FOR KANKARIA (KKF) WERE WEIGHED AT THE STATIC WEIGHBRIDGE AT THE BOOKING POINT VSPS AND WEIGHMENT WAS WITNESSED BY THE RAILWAY STAFF AT THE BOOKING POINT, AND THE WEIGHT RECORDED ON RAILWAY RECEIPTS UNDER THE COLUMN ¿ACTUAL WEIGHT¿ WAS THE WEIGHT NOTED ON THE WEIGHBRIDGE AND WITNESSED BY THE RAILWAY STAFF. COPY OF RRS WITH THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. EN-ROUTE WEIGHMENT OF WAGONS IS HOWEVER NOT ACCEPTED AND THE WAGON WAS WEIGHED AT THE DESTINATION I.E. KANKARIA (KKF) SIDING AT AHMEDABAD ON A MOVING WEIGHBRIDGE AND METHOD ADOPTED FOR ARRIVING AT THE NET WEIGHT WAS ALSO WRONG. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE KKF WEIGHBRIDGE WAS FAULTY. AFTER WEIGHING AT KANKARIA UNDER THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES, UNDER CHARGES WAS WRONGLY RAISED BY THE RAILWAY AUTHORITY. THE UNDER CHARGES AMOUNT WAS PAID TO RAILWAYS UNDER PROTEST. WE DO NOT AGREE WITH ARGUMENTS OF RAILWAYS THAT GENUINE ATTEMPT TO SORT OUT THE CLAIM IS MISSING AS NO PAPER OR EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRODUCEDTO SHOW THAT THE OFFICERS OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING MET THE RAILWAY OFFICERS FOR SETTLING THE CASE. THE CLAIM FOR UNDERCHARGES WAS FILED WITH RAILWAYS ALONG WITH ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS VIDE OUR LETTER NO.: AHMD/MKTG/96/911 DATED 14.08.1996. THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WERE SUBMITTED ALONGWITH THE SAID LETTER ¿ 1) RAILWAY RECEIPTS 2) MONEY RECEIPTS THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS WERE SUBMITTED THROUGH REGISTERED POST WITH AD, TO THE CHIEF CLAIMS OFFICER, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI. SUBSEQUENTLY THE CLAIMS FOR UNDERCHARGES WAS FILED IN THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , AHMEDABAD BRANCH ,ON 08.04.1999 ALONGWITH THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS- 1) APPLICATION 2) RAILWAY RECEIPTS 3) MONEY RECEIPTS 4) WEIGHMENT DETAILS 5) STC DETAILS 6) PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE  17/Sep/2011      No  No  No  No
 49  OA/32/2009  2081000081 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  2653146  WR  RCT/ADI  CLAIM FOR NON DELIVERY OF TW NO. NF-91011 WHICH WAS BOOKED VIDE RR NO.244211 DT.02.10.2006, PREFERRED WITH WESTERN RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/WR/E/01/2007-08 DT. 09.04.2004 FOR RS 2653146/-. WESTERN RAILWAY REPUDIATED CLAIM AS ¿TIME BARRED¿ VIDE LETTER REF.NO.Y/POL/CPOL/MIHK /CCG /1080700141/04/2007-08/TB DATED 21.05.2007. AN APPEAL WAS MADE VIDE LETTER DATED 28.05.2007 TO CONDONE DELAY AND CONSIDER CLAIM FOR SETTLEMENT. CCO, W.RLY VIDE LETTER DATED 11.10.2007 INFORMED THAT, TANKWAGON WAS PLACED FOR DECANTATION AT HAZIRA SIDING ON 21.05.07 ALONGWITH RAKE OF HPCL. ON TAKING UP MATTER WITH HPCL, THEY HAVE DENIED ABOUT DECANTATION OF TANKWAGON. ACCORDINGLY INFORMED TO CCO, W.RLY VIDE LETTER DATED 26.02.2008. DY. CCO,W.RLY VIDE LETTER DATED 8.9.2008 INFORMED ABOUT REPUDIATION OF CLAIM SAYING TANKWAGON IS DECANTED BY HPCL FOR WHICH RAILWAY DID NOT PRODUCE ANY DECANTATION PROOF. FURTHER AGAIN APPEAL WAS MADE BY S VIDE LETTER DATED 13.10.2008. BUT CCO, W. RLY DID NOT TOOK ANY COGNIZANCE OF SAME. THEN SUIT WAS FILED IN RCT AHMEDABAD IN 2009.RCT AHMEDABAD NOT YET DELIVERED JUDGMENT.  08/Apr/2011      No  No  No  No
 50  OA/30/2010  2081000183 RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LIMITED  1495520  WR  HC/AMD  THE MATERIAL DISPATCHED AGAINST THE SAID RAILWAY RECEIPT BOOKED FOR KANKARIA (KKF) WERE WEIGHED AT THE STATIC WEIGHBRIDGE AT THE BOOKING POINT VSPS AND WEIGHMENT WAS WITNESSED BY THE RAILWAY STAFF AT THE BOOKING POINT, AND THE WEIGHT RECORDED ON RAILWAY RECEIPTS UNDER THE COLUMN ¿ACTUAL WEIGHT¿ WAS THE WEIGHT NOTED ON THE WEIGHBRIDGE AND WITNESSED BY THE RAILWAY STAFF. COPY OF RRS WITH THIS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. EN-ROUTE WEIGHMENT OF WAGONS IS HOWEVER NOT ACCEPTED AND THE WAGON WAS WEIGHED AT THE DESTINATION I.E. KANKARIA (KKF) SIDING AT AHMEDABAD ON A MOVING WEIGHBRIDGE AND METHOD ADOPTED FOR ARRIVING AT THE NET WEIGHT WAS ALSO WRONG. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE KKF WEIGHBRIDGE WAS FAULTY. AFTER WEIGHING AT KANKARIA UNDER THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES, UNDER CHARGES WAS WRONGLY RAISED BY THE RAILWAY AUTHORITY. THE UNDER CHARGES AMOUNT WAS PAID TO RAILWAYS UNDER PROTEST. WE DO NOT AGREE WITH ARGUMENTS OF RAILWAYS THAT GENUINE ATTEMPT TO SORT OUT THE CLAIM IS MISSING AS NO PAPER OR EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRODUCEDTO SHOW THAT THE OFFICERS OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING MET THE RAILWAY OFFICERS FOR SETTLING THE CASE. THE CLAIM FOR UNDERCHARGES WAS FILED WITH RAILWAYS ALONG WITH ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS VIDE OUR LETTER NO.: AHMD/MKTG/07-08/1009 DATED 31.08.2007. THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WERE SUBMITTED ALONGWITH THE SAID LETTER ¿ 1) RAILWAY RECEIPTS 2) MONEY RECEIPTS THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS WERE SUBMITTED THROUGH REGISTERED POST WITH AD, TO THE CHIEF CLAIMS OFFICER, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI. SUBSEQUENTLY THE CLAIMS FOR UNDERCHARGES WAS FILED IN THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL , AHMEDABAD BRANCH ,ON 09.04.2010 ALONGWITH THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS- 1) APPLICATION 2) RAILWAY RECEIPTS 3) MONEY RECEIPTS 4) WEIGHMENT DETAILS 5) STC DETAILS 6) PHOTOCOPY OF NOTICE  17/Sep/2011      No  No  No  No
 51  OA/26/2010  2081000232 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  44360350  WR  RCT/ADI  CLAIM FOR NON DELIVERY OF 23 TWS, WHICH WERE BOOKED VIDE RR NO.226000626 DT.29.08.2009, PREFERRED WITH WESTERN RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/WR/E/01/2009-10 DT. 18.09.2009 FOR RS 44360350/-. THESE TANKWAGONS WERE LOST IN FIRE ACCIDENT ENROUTE AT PLACE IN BETWEEN LAKADIA AND SHIVALAKHA, WHICH TOOK PLACE ON 30.08.2009. WESTERN RAILWAY ACKNOWLEDGED CLAIM VIDE THEIR LETTER REF.NO. Y/POL/CPOL/NFST/CCG/1080901031/10/2009-10 DT. 6.10.2009. FURTHER FOLLOW UPS MADE BY US VIDE LETTER DATED 27.10.2009, 29.09.2009, 17.11.2009. CCO, WESTERN RLY REPUDIATED CLAIM VIDE LETTER DATED 13.01.2010 SAYING IOC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ACCIDENT. SAME WAS REPLIED BY US VIDE LETTER DATED 27.01.2010 INFORMING THAT, BEING CARRIER OF PRODUCT RAILWAY IS RESPONSIBLE. REMINDERS SENT VIDE LETTER DATED 15.02.2010, 9.3.2010, 9.4.2010, 11.5.2010 8.6.2010 AND 17.07.2010. BUT CCO, W. RLY DID NOT TOOK ANY COGNIZANCE OF SAME. THEN SUIT WAS FILED IN RCT AHMEDABAD IN 2010. RCT AHMEDABAD NOT YET DELIVERED JUDGMENT  08/Apr/2011      No  No  No  No
 52  OA/5/2008  2140800021 INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITED  1034929  SEC  RCT/BPL  CLAIM FOR LEAKAGE/SHORTAGE OF TW NO. WR-907223, BOOKED VIDE RR NO.E-463703 DT.17.02.2005, PREFERRED WITH SOUTH EAST CENTRAL RLY VIDE LETTER REF.NO. SD/SECR/L/04/2004-05 DT.23.03.2005 FOR LOSS OF 43.506 KL AMOUNTING TO RS. 1034930/-. SECR ACKNOWLEDGED REGISTERED CLAIM VIDE LETTER REF NO. Y/POL/MCS/BSPA-1140500045/04/05-06 DATED 29.06.2006. CORRESSPONDENCE EXCHANGED WITH SECR TILL JANUARY 2008, BUT SECR DID NOT SETTLED THE CLAIM, HENCE FINALLY SUIT FILED IN RCT,BHOPAL. SECR SETTLED AND PAID AN AMOUNT OF RS. 394306/- AT HIS CONVENIENCE BY TAKING PRICE OF EX REFINERY TRANSACTION, WHEREAS ACTUAL LOSSES SUFFERED IS BASED ON ACTUAL SELLING PRICE AT DESTINATION. HENCE JUSTICE NEEDED FOR THE AMOUNT OF RS.640623/- WHICH IS A LOSS TO IOC.  02/Dec/2010      No  No  No  No
    Total Argument Cases    52