IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.151 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY,DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LIMITED WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.152 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LIMITED WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.153 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA - 2 - 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LTD. WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.154 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LTD. WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.155 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LTD. WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.156 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI null ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI - 3 - 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LTD. WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.157 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LTD. WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.158 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LIMITED WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.159 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA - 4 - Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LIMITED WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No.160 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LIMITED WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No. 161 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LIMITED WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR With MA No. 168 of 2010 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, A BODY CORPORATE, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 16-20, BARAKHAMBHA LANE, NEW DELHI ITS - 5 - REGIONAL OFFICE AT ARUNCHAL BUILDING, EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- KOTWALI, DISTT.- PATNA AND ONE OF ITS SEVERAL STORAGE DEPOTS AT KHAGAUL, DANAPUR, DISTT.- PATNA Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER WESTERN RAILWAY, CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, KOLKATA 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER EASTERN RAILWAY, DANAPUR, P.S.- KHAGAUL, DISTT.- PATNA 4. BIHAR STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING UNION LIMITED WEST LAWN, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN, DISTT.- PATNA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR **** For the appellant .. Mr. Prabhakar Tekriwal, Adv. For the respondents .. M/S Anil Singh, Anil Kumar Sinha, Naresh Dikshit and Mrs. Parul Ranjan, Advs. **** /7/ 30.08.2010 Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. All the cases are heard together as all cases have common question of law and in all the cases point in issue is the same as there is petition filed in execution cases of the respective claim and though the order has been passed separately, but, the sum and substance of the impugned order of all the cases have a similar point and, hence, are being disposed off by this common order. 3. The appellants filed a claim case separately for compensation for loss due to the dispatch of the fertilizer in violation of consignment. The consignment of the fertilizer - 6 - good in all the cases have the same destination though the amounts of the goods to be delivered were different and so their claim of the amount were also different. However, the claim of the appellants allowed to their respective amounts with an interest of nine per cent per annum. However, during the pendency of their claims, the parties agreed to lower down the rate of the claim and so even after the award/decree the parties filed petition to review their award in terms of the agreed rate of the agreement agreed between the parties which was in consonance with the consent of the parties so the claim was amended/reviewed. 4. The learned counsel for the appellants, however, have a grievance that though they were paid the claim amount, but, the interest of nine per cent granted to them has not been paid and so they file a petition before the executing Court that though they have agreed and given consent to lower the agreed compensation amount, but the consent was not given with regard to the interest on the said amount as granted by the Tribunal earlier at the rate of nine per cent per annum has and the said amount of the interest granted be also released from the Railway. 5. However, on the said petition regarding the nine - 7 - per cent interest per annum there is no specific finding in the order by the Tribunal as to why the nine per cent interest per annum has not been paid. The learned counsel for the appellants, however, contends that in the impugned order the Tribunal has though ordered that the original order of the Tribunal, dated 06.05.1991, after the review of the amended order, passed in view of the review petition, dated 18.12.1998, the payment has been made and so there is no further claim. However, the learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the review was with regard to the amount claimed for the compensation for the loss of the original amount shall be deemed to that extent, but, the lower Court did not consider regarding the nine per cent interest granted on that amount and mere reducing that amount in view of the agreement between the parties does not devoid the appellants the interest granted on the said amount. 6. The learned counsel for the appellants, however, contends that though they have specifically claim the interest, but the learned Tribunal has neither given any finding with regard to the interest at the rate of nine per cent nor specifically given any reasoning and, hence, the learned - 8 - counsel for the other side also conceded that there is no specific reasoning regarding nine per cent interest. 7. The learned counsel for the other side, however, has submitted that the impugned order, itself, deemed that the claim of nine per cent has been rejected by the Tribunal in view of the amendment. However, there is no reasoning for rejecting nine per cent and between the parties are speculating on the matter that it has been deemed to have been rejected is not sustainable without a reasoning as reasoning in judicial domain is the least beat of the judgment and without a reasoning nothing can be said to be presumed. However, it is apparent that there is no specific finding on the issue raised and, hence, the impugned order is set aside to that extent and the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to specifically giving the finding why the nine per dent granted by the Tribunal has not been executed. 8. With these observations and directions, this application is disposed off. Cp:2/S.A. (Gopal Prasad, J. )