AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE complainant is the Jalpaiguri Zilla Kreta Suraksha Samity, represented by its President. THE complainant approached the Forum claiming compensation @ Rs. 1,000/- each for every passenger and for every part of the journey. Besides he has claimed Rs. 500/- as cost of litigation.
THE complainant booked several berths in Rajdhani Express for travel from Jalpaiguri to New Delhi and back. According to the complainant he has been allotted side-berths causing much discomfort to him and persons accompanying him. He states that the side-berths are shorter in length and breadth and so he cannot stretch his legs in full. Moreover, the side-berths are placed in such a way that they allow thoroughfare from one corner of the compartment to another. This caused much inconvenience to him and his fellow passengers. THEy had to spend sleepless night. THE fare for one-way journey was Rs. 1,225/-. He claims that because of these difficulties the whole purpose of journey by Rajdhani Express was frustrated. So, he prayed that the side-berths should be made equal in length and breadth with other berths. He has also claimed compensation as aforesaid. The case was contested by the opposite party-Railways by filing a written version wherein it has been stated that in the requisition form there was a column for choice of berth but the complainant did not exercise his choice for other berths and so the side-berths were allotted to him by the computer machine. According to the Railways the railway compartments had been built as per the specification given by the Govt. of India and so far no objection about their unsuitability was raised by anybody. Besides several other objections were taken.
Upon consideration of materials the Forum observed that the first relief claimed by the complainant couldn''t be granted on the ground that if this is allowed then the compartment would require restructuring. So the Forum declined to grant any relief in this regard.
THE Forum observed that because of the position of the side-berths and their length and breadth the complainant could not comfortably complete the journey. Hence there was deficiency in service. There is no dispute that the side-berths are shorter in length and breadth compared to the other berths. A passage runs in between the main block-berths and the side-berths and this passage is being used by the passengers for going from one corner of the compartment to another. The grievance of the complainant is that the movement of the people through this passage caused discomfort and disturbance to his sleep. He could not stretch his legs in full so as to comfortably lie down.
IN the petition of complaint the complainant has not given his height as also the height of the co-travellers. So we could not understand whether the complainant felt uneasy in stretching his legs in full. The complainant did not complain about the discomfort experienced by him during the journey to the Guard on duty nor did he seek change of berth. There is no cogent material to show that the complainant suffered any particular injury because of shorter length of the side-berths. On consideration of materials it is evident that the complainants are general in nature. The structure of the compartment could not be changed only because a particular passenger feels discomfort. As noticed earlier the railway compartments have been built as per specification of the Govt. of INdia and they are for general comfort of passengers travelling in them by paying higher charges. If the grievance of the petitioner is to be redressed then the restructuring of the compartments is required to be done. We do not find the complainant making any grievance about his discomfort to the railway officials on duty nor did he register any complaint in the complaint book nor did he seek any change of berths during the journey. IN view of the circumstances, we think that the Forum was not justified in granting the second relief by way of award of compensation. So we cannot uphold the judgment which is hereby set aside. The appeal be allowed and the judgment be set aside. Appeal allowed.