TMI Blog1963 (5) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e High Court, is wrong. 3. To appreciate the contention for the appellants, the facts of the case may be stated. The suit was instituted by the plaintiff-respondent against the Union of India (UOI) and the Northern Frontier Railway represented by the General Manager, having its headquarters at Pandu. It related to a claim for recovery of a sum of ₹ 8,250/- on account of non-delivery of the goods which had been consigned to the plaintiff's firm run under the name and style of M/s. Ladu Lal Jain. The consignment consisted of 134 bags of rice and was booked from Kalyanganj station of defendant No. 2 for carriage to Kanki station of the same defendant on April 13, 1958. The goods consigned were not delivered to the plaintiff and he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 1, that the office of defendant No. 2 at Pandu was also owned and controlled by defendant No. 1 and that the office at Pandu was a branch office of the Union of India (UOI) which was controlled by defendant No. 1 from New Delhi. 5. Relying on the case reported as P. C. Biswas v. Union of India (UOI) A.I.R. 1956 Gua 85, the Trial Court decided the preliminary issue about jurisdiction against the defendants holding that the principal place from which the railway administration in a particular area is carried on is the principal place of business for the purpose of s. 20 of the Code. The single Judge of the High Court rejected the revision also on the basis of the same decision of his Court. 6. The territorial jurisdiction of a Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able to defend the suit without undue trouble. 8. The expression 'voluntarily resides or personally works for gain' cannot be appropriately applied to the case of the Government. The Government can however carry on business. The mere fact that the expression 'carries on business' is used along with the other expressions, does not mean that it would apply only to such persons to whom the other two expressions regarding residence or of personally working for gain would apply. 9. The sole contention raised for the appellants in this Court is that the running of railways by the Union of India (UOI) cannot be said to amount to its carrying on business and that therefore the fact that the headquarters of the Northern Frontie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artial, of citizens or otherwise. These provisions clearly indicate that the State can carry on business and can even exclude citizens completely or partially from carrying on that business. Running of railways is a business. That is not denied. Private companies and individuals carried on the business of running railways, prior to the State taking them over. The only question then is whether the running of railways ceases to be a business when they are run by Government. There appears to be no good reason to hold that it is so. It is the nature of the activity which defines its character. Running of railways is such an activity which comes within the expression 'business'. The fact as to who runs it and with what motive cannot affe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estion as to whether the activity in question attracts the provision of s. 2(j); who conducts the activity and whether it is conducted for profit or not do not make a material difference . To similar effect were the observations in The Corporation of the City of Nagpur v. Its employees [1960] 2 S.C.R. 942, where it was said : If a service rendered by an individual or a private person would be an industry, it would equally be an industry in the hands of a corporation . 14. It was earlier said at p. 960 : Monetary considerations for service is, therefore, not an essential characteristic of industry in a modern State . Barring the regal functions of a municipality, if such other activities of it, if undertaken by an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n by the Government for ensuring the people a cheap, regular and reliable mode of transport and is in that sense beneficial to the public. It does not, however, cease to be a commercial activity if it is run with profit motive. Indeed even private operators in order to attract custom are also interested in providing the same facilities to the public as the Government undertaking provides. Since that is so, it is difficult to see what difference there is between the activity carried on by private individuals and that carried on by Government. By reason of the fact that a commercial undertaking is owned and run by the State it does not ipso facto become a 'public service'. 16. This case simply held that commercial activity carrie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
