The Calcutta Weekly Notes June 11 1951

In The State of Bombay v. Narottamdas Jethabhai (a brief summary of the case will be found in the Notes of Cases) one of the questions which the Supreme Court had to consider was whether section 4 of the Bombay City Civil Court Act 1948 was void and inoperative by reason of its amounting to delegation of legislative powers by the Provincial Legislature to the Provincial Government of Bombay. [...] The responsibility commences as soon as the goods are delivered to the custody of the railway and covers the whole period. [...] The other newly added sections 74A 74C and 741) of the Act provide statutory liabilities of the railways in carrying goods and the result of these amendments is that the railways will not he liable for the loss destruction or deterioration of the goods "except upon proof of neglgence or misconduct on the part of the railway administration or any of its seants." According to Baron Alderson [...] The judicial interpretations of the terms 'negligence' and `rnisconduct' are therefore clear and yet by the Amending Act LVI of 1949 these two terms have been placed at par and the extent of the liability would be the same whether a carrier is guilty of miconduct or of negligence ; and there are no fixed rules as to degrees of negligence. [...] Entry 2 of and Entry 5.151P List II of Schedule 7 of the Government of India Act 1935 confer :.pecial powers on :rovincial Legielature the special powers being the logical censqueAces or colconntari of the power of the two Legislatures to legislate with regard to matters included in their respective Legilative List.