<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (10) TMI 768 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303459</link>
    <description>Under the Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925, read with Article III, Rule 3, the carrier&#039;s agent must issue a bill of lading on the shipper&#039;s demand after receiving the goods into charge and should not defer issuance because of later instructions or a demand for bank guarantees, unless the claimant is not the shipper. Liability for damages depends on actual loss caused by the delay. Where the bills of lading were demanded before expiry of the letter of credit and issued only after expiry, the delay prevented negotiation of the credit and attracted liability. Where the request was made only after the credit had already expired and the cargo had been delivered, no actionable loss arose and no liability followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2025 16:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=686003" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 768 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303459</link>
      <description>Under the Indian Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1925, read with Article III, Rule 3, the carrier&#039;s agent must issue a bill of lading on the shipper&#039;s demand after receiving the goods into charge and should not defer issuance because of later instructions or a demand for bank guarantees, unless the claimant is not the shipper. Liability for damages depends on actual loss caused by the delay. Where the bills of lading were demanded before expiry of the letter of credit and issued only after expiry, the delay prevented negotiation of the credit and attracted liability. Where the request was made only after the credit had already expired and the cargo had been delivered, no actionable loss arose and no liability followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303459</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>