https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307946 The appeal challenging the decree for damages granted to the Plaintiff was dismissed. The Defendant, acting as a carrier, was held liable for the loss of goods due to a fire at their premises, even though the fire was not due to negligence. The court emphasized that carriers are insurers of goods they transport, and the Defendant's attempt to rely on an exclusion clause in the special contract failed due to lack of reasonable precautions against fire. The Defendant was therefore held responsible for the loss of goods entrusted to them. en-us Thu, 21 Oct 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 May 2023 16:14:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307946 The appeal challenging the decree for damages granted to the Plaintiff was dismissed. The Defendant, acting as a carrier, was held liable for the loss of goods due to a fire at their premises, even though the fire was not due to negligence. The court emphasized that carriers are insurers of goods they transport, and the Defendant's attempt to rely on an exclusion clause in the special contract failed due to lack of reasonable precautions against fire. The Defendant was therefore held responsible for the loss of goods entrusted to them. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 21 Oct 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307946