Chief Commercial Officer (Manager) & 2 Ors vs Hargovind Chaudhury

V.K.Jain, J

The complainant/respondent travelled from Bhopal to Howrah by Shipra Express on 15.02.2015 allegedly carrying two suitcases containing valuables such as gold earrings, gold chain etc. The case of the complainant is that he had noticed some unauthorized persons in the reserved compartment in which he was travelling but since no T.T.E. was available in the compartment, the aforesaid information could not be given to him. This is also the case of the complainant that when the train reached Howrah Station, he noticed that the suitcases which he was carrying with him, had been stolen. An FIR was lodged by him at Howrah Station. Alleging the petitioner to be responsible for the theft of his valuables, the complainant/respondent approached the concerned District Forum by way of a consumer complaint.

The complaint was resisted by the petitioner on the ground that during the course of journey, the compartments are mend by the checking staff and in case the complainant had noticed any unauthorized person in the reserved compartment, he ought to have lodged a complaint by sending SMS to the mobile number dedicated by the Indian Railways for this purpose. The District Forum having allowed the complaint and having directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- alongwith the cost of litigation quantified at Rs.10,000/-, as well as punitive damages quantified at the rate of Rs.200/- per day till compliance of its order, the petitioner approached the concerned State Commission by way of an appeal. Vide impugned order dated 21.11.2017, the State Commission set aside the direction for punitive damages while maintaining the rest of the order passed by the District Forum. The State Commission, while setting aside the punitive damages, imposed a penalty of Rs.10,000/- upon the petitioner.

Being aggrieved from the order passed by the State Commission, the petitioner is before this Commission by way of this revision petition.

The case of the complainant/respondent is that he had boarded the train at Bhopal and the theft of the suitcases was noticed by him when the train arrived near Howrah railway station. Since there are a number of railway stations between Bhopal and Howrah, the train must have stopped at those stations to get the passengers desiring to get down at those stations to get down and to enable the passengers seeking to board the train from those stations, to board the train for their onward journey. In the absence of evidence in this regard, it cannot be known whether the suitcases of the complainant were stolen by some unauthorized traveller or by one of the passengers travelling on a reserved seat.

This is not the case of the complainant/respondent that he had locked the suitcases with the help of a chain before he went to sleep. Therefore, the suitcases could have been stolen by any person including a passenger travelling on a reserved ticket. There is no explanation from the complainant as to why he did not lock the suitcases with the help of a chain before he went to sleep. This was the least precaution expected from the complainant before he went to sleep since the train was to halt at a number of railway stations between Bhopal and Howrah. Had the complainant taken the aforesaid minimal precaution, the theft, in all probability, would not have happened.

I have also perused the FIR which the complainant/respondent had lodged at Howrah station. In the said FIR, there is no allegation of any unauthorized person having entered the compartment in which the complainant was travelling. Therefore, it would be difficult to even accept his case that several unauthorized persons had entered the compartment in which he was travelling.

In the absence of any proof of negligence on the part of the petitioner, resulting in loss to the complainant solely on account of such negligence, the impugned orders directing payment of compensation to the complainant on account of theft of his belongings cannot be sustained. The impugned orders are therefore, set aside and the complaint is consequently dismissed.

Fee of the Amicus Curiae be paid as per rules.