{"id":187899,"date":"1962-05-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1962-04-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962"},"modified":"2017-03-02T10:25:59","modified_gmt":"2017-03-02T04:55:59","slug":"union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962","title":{"rendered":"Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1963 AIR  422, \t\t  1963 SCR  (2) 702<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: R Dayal<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Dayal, Raghubar<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nUNION OF INDIA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nM\/s.  UDHO RAM &amp; SONS\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n01\/05\/1962\n\nBENCH:\nDAYAL, RAGHUBAR\nBENCH:\nDAYAL, RAGHUBAR\nKAPUR, J.L.\nGUPTA, K.C. DAS\n\nCITATION:\n 1963 AIR  422\t\t  1963 SCR  (2) 702\n\n\nACT:\nRailway-Loss  of  goods\t in  transit-Negligence\t of  railway\nservants-Liability-indian  Railways Act, 1890 (IX of  1890),\ns.   72-Indian Contract Act, 1872 (IX of 1872), s. 151.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nCertain\t goods\tconsigned by a merchant to  the\t respondent.\nSome of the goods were lost in transit.\t The respondent sued\nthe  railway authorities for damages for the loss on  ground\nthat  the  loss 'Was incurred due to the negligence  of\t the\nrailway\t authorities.\tThe  defence raised  was  that\tloss\noccurred  due to factors beyond the control of\tthe  railway\nauthorities.  The suit was dismissed by the trial court.  On\nappeal\tthe High- Court reversed the judgment of  the  trial\ncourt  and found that the loss was caused by the  negligence\nand misconduct of the railway authorities in as much as\t the\nrailway police failed to take precaution to see that no body\ninterfered with the goods.\nThe  Union of India appealed to the Supreme Court by way  of\ncertificate granted by the High Court.\nHeld, that the responsibility of the railway under s. 72  of\nthe  Indian Railways Act is subject to the provisions of  s.\n151  of the Indian Contract Act and the Railway as a  bailer\nwas bound to take as much care of the goods bailed to it  as\na   man\t  of   ordinary\t  prudence   would   under   similar\ncircumstances.\t The  loss  having taken place\tdue  to\t the\nnegligence of the railway servants the railway is liable for\nthe loss incurred by the respondent.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 581 of 60.<br \/>\nAppeal from the judgment and decree dated April 23. 1958, of<br \/>\nthe Punjab High Court (Circuit Bench) Delhi in Civil Regular<br \/>\nFirst Appeal No. 32-D of 1953.\n<\/p>\n<p>Naunit Lal and D. Gupta, for the appellant,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">703<\/span><br \/>\nGurbachan Singh and Harbans Singh, for the respondent.<br \/>\n1962.  May 1. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nRAGHUBAR  DAYAL, J.-This, appeal, on certificate granted  by<br \/>\nthe   Punjab   High   Court,   arises\tin   the   following<br \/>\ncircumstances.\n<\/p>\n<p>M\/s.   Radha  Ram Sohan Lal of\tCalcutta  consigned  certain<br \/>\ngoods  to  self\t at  Delhi.   of  the  consignment,  certain<br \/>\narticles  were not delivered to M\/s.  Udho Ram &amp;  Sons,\t the<br \/>\nplaintiffs,  in\t whose favour the railway receipt  had\tbeen<br \/>\nendorsed  by  the consigner.  Having failed to\treceive\t the<br \/>\ncompensation  for  the\tloss  suffered\ton  account  of\t the<br \/>\narticles not delivered, the suit giving rise to this  appeal<br \/>\nwas  instituted.  There is now no dispute&#8217; about the  amount<br \/>\nof  loss,  determined  by  the Court,  as  suffered  by\t the<br \/>\nplaintiffs.\n<\/p>\n<p>The only dispute between the parties is whether the loss  of<br \/>\ngoods  in transit between Calcutta and Delhi was due to\t the<br \/>\nmisconduct and negligence of the railways or not.  The Union<br \/>\nof  India, the dependent, contended that the  loss  occurred<br \/>\ndue  to\t circumstances\tbeyond the control  of\tthe  railway<br \/>\nadministration.\n<\/p>\n<p>The  trial Court found that the railway wagon in  which\t the<br \/>\nconsignment was loaded bad been thereafter properly  riveted<br \/>\nand  sealed at Howrah, that the seals and rivet of one\tdoor<br \/>\nof  the\t wagon\twere found open when the  train\t which\tleft<br \/>\nHowrah at 1. 30 a. m. on October 1, 1949, reached Chandanpur<br \/>\nStation\t at  3.15 a. m., the same night,  the  train  having<br \/>\nstopped\t for 14 minutes at the Howrah-Burdwan Link  for\t the<br \/>\nhome signal at 2. 05 a. m., and that the railway  protection<br \/>\npolice\tescorted the train.  The High Court  accepted  these<br \/>\nfindings and they are not questioned.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">704<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The trial Court, however, found that the precaution taken of<br \/>\nposting railway protection police in a good,; train, in view<br \/>\nof the frequent thefts in running trains between Howrah\t and<br \/>\nChandanpur,  amounted to the railways taking proper care  of<br \/>\nthe  goods delivered to them as carriers and that  therefore<br \/>\nthe   railways\twere  not  guilty  of  any  negligence\t and<br \/>\nmisconduct.  It was of the view that the railway  protection<br \/>\npolice which usually traveled in the guard&#8217;s van, could\t not<br \/>\npossibly know what was happening in the wagons at the  other<br \/>\nand  or in the middle of the train during the  journey.\t  It<br \/>\ntherefore dismissed the suit.\n<\/p>\n<p>On appeal, the High Court held the railways responsible\t for<br \/>\nthe  loss which, in its view, was due to its negligence\t and<br \/>\nmisconduct inasmuch as there was no evidence on record\tthat<br \/>\nthe  railway protection police took any precautions  to\t see<br \/>\nthat nobody interfered with the train when it halted for  15<br \/>\nminutes\t at the Howrah-Burdwan Link at night.  There was  no<br \/>\nother arrangement for watch and ward at the Link.  There was<br \/>\nno  evidence  as  to what was the strength  of\tthe  railway<br \/>\nprotection  ,police or to show that it did stir out  of\t the<br \/>\ntrain  see  that the wagons were not  interfered  with.\t  It<br \/>\ntherefore  concluded that the servants of the  railway\twere<br \/>\nnegligent  and\tdid nothing to see  that  opportunities\t for<br \/>\ntheft  were eliminated as far as possible, that the  railway<br \/>\nadministration\twas  responsible for the negligence  of\t its<br \/>\nemployees  as  it could act through its employees  and\tthat<br \/>\ntherefore  the lose of goods was due to the  misconduct\t and<br \/>\nnegligence  of\tthe  railways.\tIt  therefore  reversed\t the<br \/>\ndecree\tof the trial court and decreed the plaintiffs&#8217;\tsuit<br \/>\nfor the amount of loss hold suffered by the plaintiffs.\t  It<br \/>\nis this decree against which the Union of India has obtained<br \/>\nthe  certificate of fitness for appeal from the Punjab\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt and has preferred this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">705<\/span><\/p>\n<p>There  is no evidence on record that the railway  protection<br \/>\npolice which escorted the train was adequate in strength for<br \/>\nthe  purpose  of seeing that the goods were  not  interfered<br \/>\nwith in transit.  In fact, the defendants did not allege  in<br \/>\ntheir  written statement that any railway protection  police<br \/>\nescorted  the train.  The present of the railway  protection<br \/>\npolice with the train was just deposed to by Chatterjee,  D.<br \/>\nW,  10,\t the  then Assistant Station  Master  at  Chandanpur<br \/>\nRailway Station.  He did not mention that fact in any of his<br \/>\nmessages  or  memorandum in which he  simply  mentioned\t the<br \/>\npresence  of  the railway protection police at the  time  of<br \/>\nre&#8211;sealing the wagon.\tHe stated in cross examination\tthat<br \/>\nhe did not remember from memory the events of the occurrence<br \/>\nat Chandanpur station on October 1, 1949, and was making his<br \/>\nstatement  on the basis of the record before him.   However,<br \/>\nboth the Courts below have recorded the finding that railway<br \/>\nprotection  police  did\t escort\t the  train.   There  is  no<br \/>\nevidence  as  to why the police force could not see  to\t the<br \/>\nnon-interference  with the wagons when the train  halted  at<br \/>\nthe  Link where, according to the Courts below, the  thieves<br \/>\nprobably  get  at the wagon and tampered with its  seal\t and<br \/>\nrivets.\t  In the absence of any evidence about the  strength<br \/>\nof  the\t railway protection police, the\t contention  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant that the force was adequate cannot be accepted.<br \/>\nIt may be true that any precautions taken may not be  always<br \/>\nsuccessful against the loss in transit on account of theft,,<br \/>\nbut in the present case there is no evidence with respect to<br \/>\nthe extent of the precautions taken and with respect to what<br \/>\nthe railway protection police itself did at the place  where<br \/>\nthe train had to stop.\tWe cannot accept the contention that<br \/>\nthe  railway protection police could not have moved  out  of<br \/>\nthe  guard&#8217;s van due to the uncertainly of the\tstoppage  of<br \/>\nthe train at the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">706<\/span><br \/>\nsignal.\t It was the job of its members to get down on  every<br \/>\nstoppage  of  the train and to keep an eye  at\tthe  various<br \/>\nwagons, as best as they could.\n<\/p>\n<p>There could be no risk of the train leaving them on the spot<br \/>\nsuddenly.   They could climb up when the train was to  move.<br \/>\nThe  wagon in which the plaintiffs&#8217; goods were, was  in\t the<br \/>\ncentre\tof  the train.\tIt was the 29th\t marriage  from\t the<br \/>\nother  end.   It  must be taken to be the  duty\t of  railway<br \/>\nprotection police to get out of the guard&#8217;s van whenever the<br \/>\ntrain  stops, be it at the railway platform or at any  other<br \/>\nplace.\t In  fact, the necessity to get down and  watch\t the<br \/>\ntrain  when  it\t stops at a place other than  a\t station  is<br \/>\ngreater\t than  when the train stops at a Station,  where  at<br \/>\nleast  on  the station side there would be some\t persons  in<br \/>\nwhose presence the miscreants would not dare to temper\twith<br \/>\nany  wagon  and\t any tempering to be done at  a\t station  is<br \/>\nlikely to be on the off side.\n<\/p>\n<p>The responsibility of the railways under s. 72 of the Indian<br \/>\nRailways  Act is subject to the provisions of s. 151 of\t the<br \/>\nIndian\tContract Act.  Section 151 states that in all  cases<br \/>\nof bailment, the bailer is bound to take as much care of the<br \/>\ngoods  bailed  to him as a man of ordinary  prudence  would,<br \/>\nunder  similar\tcircumstance, take of his own goods  of\t the<br \/>\nsame bulk, quality and value as the goods bailed.   Needless<br \/>\nto say that an ordinary person traveling in a train would be<br \/>\nparticular  is keeping an eye on his goods  especially\twhen<br \/>\nthe  train  stops.  It is not therefore imposing  a  higaher<br \/>\nstandard  of care on the railway administration when  it  is<br \/>\nsaid  that its staff, and especially the railway  protection<br \/>\npolice\tspecially deputed for the purpose of seeing that  no<br \/>\nloss  takes  place to the goods, should get  down  from\t the<br \/>\nwagon and keep an eye on the wagons in the train in order to<br \/>\nsee that no unauthorised person gets at the goods.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">707<\/span><\/p>\n<p>We  are\t therefore of opinion that the finding of  the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt that the loss took place due to the negligence of\t the<br \/>\nrailway\t  servants   and,  consequently,  of   the   railway<br \/>\nadministration, is justified.\n<\/p>\n<p>We therefore dismiss the appeal with costs.<br \/>\nAppeal dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962 Equivalent citations: 1963 AIR 422, 1963 SCR (2) 702 Author: R Dayal Bench: Dayal, Raghubar PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIA Vs. RESPONDENT: M\/s. UDHO RAM &amp; SONS DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01\/05\/1962 BENCH: DAYAL, RAGHUBAR BENCH: DAYAL, RAGHUBAR KAPUR, J.L. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-187899","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1962-04-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-02T04:55:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Union Of India vs M\\\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962\",\"datePublished\":\"1962-04-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-02T04:55:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962\"},\"wordCount\":1396,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962\",\"name\":\"Union Of India vs M\\\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1962-04-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-02T04:55:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Union Of India vs M\\\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1962-04-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-02T04:55:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962","datePublished":"1962-04-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-02T04:55:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962"},"wordCount":1396,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962","name":"Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1962-04-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-02T04:55:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-udho-ram-sons-on-1-may-1962#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Union Of India vs M\/S. Udho Ram &amp; Sons on 1 May, 1962"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187899","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=187899"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187899\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=187899"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=187899"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=187899"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}