AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The dispute pertains to 2015, we are in 2018.
We heard the learned counsel for the revisionists - railways, and perused the material on record.
This revision has been filed by the revisionists - railways against concurrent findings of the District Forum and the State Commission. The District Forum vide its Order dated 30.06.2017 partly allowed the complaint. The State Commission vide its impugned Order dated 13.09.2017 dismissed the appeal. The two fora below found deficiency in service on the part of the revisionists - appellants - opposite parties - railways.
Admitted facts are that the complainant along with his mother, wife and children was travelling on reserved berths in a reserved coach of Coimbatore - Jaipur Train No. 12969 after paying the fares and purchasing the tickets. On 21.06.2015 some unauthorized unknown persons entered the train and stole valuables of the complainant. The complainant lodged an F.I.R. of theft on 21.06.2015.
He A complaint was filed a complaint before the District Forum on 21.09.2015. The District Forum heard both sides, appraised the case, and through a reasoned Order dated 30.06.2017 partly allowed the complaint. It directed that the railways shall pay Rs. 51,850/- to the complainant within one month of its Order, i.e. within one month of 30.06.2017, failing which, after one month, the complainant shall be entitled to interest of 9% p. a. on the awarded amount from the date of filing the complaint, i.e. from 21.09.2015; in addition, it awarded Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation.
The District Forum examined the rival contentions compressively:
9- ge vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx }kjk mBkbZ xbZ vkifRr;ksa ls lgefr izdV ugh djrs gS D;kssafd jsyos fjtosZ'ku ds nkSjku ;k=h ls 2 #i;s lqj{kk 'kqYd fy;k tkrk gS vkSj fjtosZ'ku dksp esa ;k=h }kjk lkFk ys tk;s tkus okys lkeku dh lqj{kk dh ftEesnkjh jsyos foHkkx@jsy iz'kklu dh gksrh gS rFkk fjtoZ dksp esa vukf/kd`r O;fDr ds izos'k dks jksdus dh ftEesnkjh Vh-Vh-bZ dh gksrh gS] vkSj vxj og blesa ukdke jgrk gS] rks blds fy, jsyos iz'kklu mRrjnk;h gSA rFkk ;k=h dks fjtosZ'ku ds }kjk tks dksp fn;k tkrk gS mlesa ;k=h dks lksus dk vf/kdkj fn;k gS vkSj bl nkSjku tks Hkh ?kVuk gksrh gS mldk ftEesnkj jsy foHkkx gksxkA
10- ifjoknh ds fo)ku vf/koDrk dk dFku gS fd jsyos DySe fVªC;wuy dk jsy esa cqd djok;s x;s iklZyksa ls lacf/kr ekeyksa dh lquokbZ dk gh {ks=kf/kdkj izkIr gS] ifjoknh ds fo)ku vf/koDrk }kjk bl laca/k esa gekjk /;ku 2005 ¼2½ CPR 37 (NC) G.M. South Central Railway V.s. Dr. R.V. Kumar and Anr., Judgment Date 04-01-2005 dh vksj fnyk;k x;k ftlesa ekuuh; jk"Vªh; miHkksDrk vk;ksx }kjk isjk la[;k 9 essa fuEu fl)kUr izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS fd &
Further, Chapter 9 of the Indian Railways Act wholly deals with Carriage of goods. A reading of the definition of the word goods and the provisions of chapter 9 relating to carriage of goods clearly indicates that the reference is to commercial goods. It is clear that such goods have to be entrusted to Railway Administration for the carriage. Such carriage in respect of certain goods can be charged Section 65 provides that whenever goods are entrusted to the Railways receipt shall be given. Section 94 provides that where goods are carried at owner's risk the railway administration shall not be responsible for any loss etc. except when it is proved that the loss was due to negligence or misconduct on its part or on the part of any of its servants. Section 13 (1)(a) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act applies to goods and animals and does not apply to personal effects, whether we call it luggage or baggage, carried by a passenger. However, in this particular case before us we are dealing with the luggage as defined at Clause 23 of Bar under section 100.
Ekkuuh; jk"Vªh; miHkksDrk vk;ksx }kjk fn;s x;s fu.kZ; esa bl fl)kUr dks izfrikfnr fd;k x;k gS fd ;fn dksbZ lkeku jsyos ls cqd djokdj Hkstk tkrk gS vkSj ;fn oks lkeku xqe gks tkrk gS rks blls lacf/kr izdj.kksa dh lquokbZ dk {ks=kf/kdkj jsyos fVªC;wuy dks gSA jsyos DySe fVªC;wuy dh /kkjk 13 ¼1½ ¼a½ eky o tkuojksa ij ykxw gksrh gS ;g O;fDrxr lkekuksa ij izHkkoh ugh gSA ekuuh; jk"Vªh; miHkksDrk vk;ksx }kjk O;fDrxr lkeuksa luggage or baggage dks jsyos ,DV dh /kkjk 100 ls ckgj@Bar fd;k x;k gSA ekStwnk izdj.k esa ifjoknh }kjk lkeku cqd ugha djk;k x;k FkkA eap dh jk; esa ifjoknh }kjk tks O;fDrxr lkeku vius lkFkk ys tk;k x;k Fkk oks lkeku lQj ds nkSjku pksjh gqvk gS bl dkj.k ekuuh; jk"Vªh; miHkksDrk vk;ksx }kjk fn;sx;s fu.kZ; 2005 (2) CPR 37 (NC) G.M. South Central railway Vs. Dr. R.V. Kumar and Anr., Judgment Date 04-01-2005 dh jks'kuh esa ;g izdj.k lquus dh {ks=kf/kdkfjr bl eap dks izkIr gS vr% vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx }kjk {ks=kf/kdkj ds laca/k esa mBkbZ xbZ vkifRr lkjghu gSA
11- vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx }kjk ;g Hkh vkifRr mBkbZ xbZ gS fd ifjoknh }kjk dks;EcVqj ls t;iqj vkrs le; ;k=k ds nkSjku fnukad 21-06-2015 dks vkyksV ls eykoyh ds e/; lkeku pksjh gksuk crk;k x;k gS bl dkj.k ls ;g izdj.k bl eap ds {ks=kf/kdkj esa ugha vkrk gS ifjoknh dks {ks=kf/kdkj izkIr eap ds le{k ifjokn izLrqr djuk pkfg;s FkkA ge vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx }kjk mBkbZ xbZ bl vkifRr ls Hkh lgefr izdV ugha djrs gS D;ksafd mHkksDrk laj{k.k vf/kfu;e 1986 dh /kkjk 11 ds vuqlkj &
Jurisdiction of the District Forum :- (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the District Forum shall have jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of the goods or services and the compensation, if any, claimed does not exceeds rupees twenty lakhs.
(2) A complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction,-
(a) the opposite party or each of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily residents or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain, or
(b) any of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily residents or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the permission of the District Form is given, or the opposite parties who do not reside, or carry on business or have a branch office, or personally work for gain, as the case may be, acquiesce in such institution; or
(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.
miHkksDrk laj{k.k vf/kfu;e 1986 dh /kkjk 11 ds vuqlkj ^^ifjoknh dks ml LFkku ij ifjokn izLrqr djus dh vf/kdkfjrk izkIr gS ftl LFkku ij vizkFkhZ dh 'kk[kk gks ;k vizkFkhZ dh ,d ls vf/kd 'kk[kk;sa O;olk; djrh gksaA^^ vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx dk lhdj esa dk;kZy; fLFkr gS rFkk ifjoknh }kjk Mh-vkj-,e-¼dkWef'kZ;y½ jsyos eq[;ky;] t;iqj] jkt- dks i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gSA lkFk gh ifjoknh }kjk lhdj ftys ds Qrsgiqj ls Vªsu la[;k 12969 dks;EcVqj t;iqj gsrq fnukad 01-04-2015 dks viuk o vius ifjokjtu dk vkj{k.k ;k=k fnukad 19-06-2015 gsrq djok;k x;k Fkk bl izdkj bl eap dks ;g izdj.k lquus dh {ks=kf/kdkfjr izkIr gS rFkk vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx }kjk tks {ks=kf/kdkj ds laca/k esa vkifRr yh xbZ gS oks lkjghu gSA
12- jsyos fjtossZ'ku ds nkSjku ;k=h ls 2 #i;s lqj{kk 'kqYd fy;k tkrk gS vkSj fjtosZ'ku dksp esa ;k=h }kjk lkFk ys tk;s tkus okys lkeku dh lqj{kk dh ftEesnkjh jsyos foHkkx@jsy iz'kklu dh gksrh gS RkFkk fjtoZ dksp esa vukf/kd`r O;fDr ds izos'k dks jksdus dh ftEesnkjh Vh Vh bZ dh gksrh gSA fjtosZ'ku ls tc ;k=h dks ;k=k gsrq dksp fn;k tkrk gS rks ml le; ;k=h dks Vªsu ds dksp esa lksus dk vf/kdkj fn;k tkrk gS vkSj bl ¼----viBuh;----½ gksrh gS mldh ftEesokjh jsyos iz'kklu dh gksrh gSA ifjoknh o mlds ifjokjtu tc dks;ECkVwj ls t;iqj gsrq ;k=k dj jgs Fks rks lQj ds nkSjku fnukad 21-06-2015 dks vkyksV ls eykoyh ds e/; dksbZ vKkr O;fDr }kjk mDr dksp esa ?kqldj ifjoknh ds 3 eksckbZy] lksus dh pSu] 2 fjax o dkxtkr pqjkdj ys x;kA ifjoknh o mlds ifjokjtuksa ds mDr O;fDrxr lkeku Vªsu esa ;k=k djus ds nkSjku pksjh gqvk gSA jsyos ;k=k ds nkSjku ifjoknh ds vko';d O;fDrxr lkeku dh lqj{kk dh ftEesnkjh vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx ds lacf/kr dksp dMDVj dh Fkh ysfdu lacf/kr dksp daMDVj }kjk vius drZO; esa ykijokgh o mnklhurk cjrh xbZ ftlds dkj.k vokafNr rRo }kjk dksp esa izos'k dj ifjoknh dk mDr lkeku pksjh dj fy;k x;kA ifjoknh ds vuqlkj pksjh gq, O;fDrxr lkeku ,d rksys lksus dh dher 30]000 #i;s] 2 eksckbZy lsV dh dher 22]850 #i;s o lksus dh pSu dh 2 fjax dh dher 28]000 #i;s Fkh bl izdkj ifjoknh ds pksjh x;s dqy lkeku dh dqy dher 80]000 #i;s crkbZ gSA
13- ifjoknh }kjk bl pksjh dh izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 371 fnukad 21-06-2015 dks ';kex<+ bankSj ij ntZ djokbZ xbZA iqfyl Fkkuk ';kex<+ }kjk vUrxZr /kkjk 380 vkbZ-ih-lh ds rgr ,Q vkbZ vkj ntZ dh xbZ RkFkk ifjoknh ds pksjh x;s lkeku dh dher 80]000 #i;s vkadh xbZA ifjoknh us pksjh x;s lkeku eksckbZy Gionee E3 jkf'k 12]500 #i;s ds fcy la[;k 3550 fnukad 21-10-2014 o eksckbZy Gionee M2 jkf'k 10]350 #i;s ds fcy la[;k 3551 fnukad 21-10-2014 dh izfr;ksa dks is'k fd;k gSA rFkk ifjoknh }kjk pksjh gqbZ lksus dh pSu 1 rkSyk dher 30]000 #i;s o lksus dh 2 fjax dheru 28]000 #i;s ds laca/k esa dgk x;k fd oks mlds }kjk lqukj ls cuokbZ xbZ Fkh ftldk dksbZ fcy @jlhn ifjoknh ds ikl miYkC/k ugha gSA eap dh jk; esa Hkkjrh; lekt esa efgykvksa esa O;fDrxr lqj{kk dkj.kksa ls tsojkr vkfn j[kus dk izpyu gS] ftlds jlhn o fcy ugh gksrs gS D;ksafd ,sls tsojkr ih<h nj ih<h pyrs jgrs gSA ifjoknh ds lksus dh ,d pSu o nks fjax dk otu 10 xzke ekursa gq, ifjoknh dks budh dher 29]000 #i;s fnyok;k tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSA bl izdkj ifjoknh dks nks eksckbZy dh dher 22]850 #i;s o lksus dh ,d pSu o nks fjax dh dqy dher 51]850 #i;s fnyok;k tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSA
14- bl izdkj mijksDr foospu ds vk/kkj ij ifjoknh ds nkSjkus ;k=k jsy foHkkx@jsy iz'kklu dh ykijokgh ls pksjh gq, O;fDrxr lkeku dh dher 51]850 #i;s dh vnk;xh gsrq jsy foHkkx mRrjnk;h gS] vr% ifjoknh }kjk izLRkqr ifjokn vkaf'kd #i ls Lohdkj fd;s tkus ;ksX; gSA
%%vkns'k%%
Qyr% ifjoknh }kjk izLrqr ifjokn fo#) vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx vkaf'kd #i ls Lohdkj fd;k tkdj vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx dks vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd oks vkns'k fnukad ls ,d ekg esa ifjoknh dks 51]850 #i;s vnk djs] vU;Fkk ,d ekg Ik'pkr ifjoknh bl jkf'k ij ifjokn izLrqr djus dh fnukad 21-09-2015 ls 9 izfr'kr okf"kZd dh nj ls C;kt izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gksxkA ifjoknh] vizkFkhZ jsy foHkkx ls ekufld larki isVs 5]000 #i;s o ifjokn O;; isVs 5]000 #i;s izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gksxkA
The railways appealed in the State Commission. The State Commission heard the appellants - railways, perused the impugned judgment of the District Forum, and vide its Order dated 13.09.2017 dismissed the appeal:
The facts of the case goes to show that the respondent consumer travelled from Coimbatore to Jaipur in reserved coach. On 21.06.2015 the articles were stolen from the reserved railway coach. Hence, the deficiency on the part of the appellant is writ large and reliance could be placed on 2015 (3) CPR 478 (NC) Union of India Vs. Ajay Kumar Agarwalla where the National Commission has held that railway is responsible for theft of luggage from running train. Further the Forum below has considered the value of stolen goods. FIR was lodged immediately after the theft and after considering the merit of the case claim has rightly been allowed.
In view of the above, there is no merit in this appeal not worth admission and liable to be rejected.
This revision has been filed under section 21(b) of the Act 1986 against the said Order dated 13.09.2017 of the State Commission. Section 21 (b) reads as below:
....to call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by any State Commission where it appears to the National Commission that such State Commission has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.
We find the Orders of the two fora below to be well-appraised and well-reasoned. The State Commission concurred with the District Forum. We note in particular the observations of the two fora quoted in paras 5 and 6 above. Within the meanings and scope of section 21(b), we find no grave error in appreciating the evidence by the two fora below, as may cause to require re-appreciation of the evidence in revision. On the face of it, we find no jurisdictional error, or a legal principle ignored, or miscarriage of justice.
There is no reason evident to interfere with the concurrent findings of the District Forum and the State Commission apropos deficiency in service on the part of the railways.
The District Forum's award (including the condition of interest specified therein) shall be complied with without further delay, failing which the District Forum shall proceed for execution as per the law (the harassment and difficulty, the uncertainty and helplessness, of the consumer should end).
We further note that the complainant was travelling with ladies (mother and wife) and children on reserved berths in a reserved coach after paying the fares and purchasing the tickets. He was right in agitating that the railways was responsible for safety and security of person and hand-held baggage, including from unknown persons who gained entry unauthorizedly and committed theft (the railways was undoubtedly responsible for theft of hand-held baggage from running train).
We furthermore note that in the facts of this case Chapter 9 and Section 100 of The Railways Act, 1989 have been correctly critiqued and appreciated by the two fora below. And also that the fora below have correctly relied on 2005(2) CPR 37(NC) G.M. South Central Railways vs. Dr. R.V. Kumar & Anr., judgement dated 04.01.2005 and 2015 (3) CPR 478 (NC) Union of India vs. Ajay Kumar Agarwalla, judgement dated 26.05.2015.
We fail to understand that, when this was an open and shut case of railways' responsibility in an admitted case of theft in running train by unknown persons who gained entry unauthorizedly, and when such matters have already been adjudicated and settled by the National Commission, as to why the railways first agitated in the District Forum, then, on the case being decided against it by a well - appraised and well - reasoned order, agitated in the State Commission, and, then, on the appeal being dismissed in limine, further agitated in revision before this Commission. We also fail to understand that if, in such cases, in such facts, railways wishes to place reliance on Chapter 9 or Section 100 of The Railways Act, 1989, or on any other law, rule, regulation or executive order, etc., what prevents it from explicitly firming-up its terms and conditions in respect of safety and security of person and hand-held baggage in running train (as part of its salient terms and conditions) and informing the general public / passengers - consumers upfront, clearly and categorically. It would undoubtedly be self-evident (to one and all) that safety and security of person and hand-held baggage in running train is a fundamental concern of each and every passenger - consumer.
A reasonable man would (rightly) assume that his person and hand-held baggage were safe and secure in running train (and especially in a reserved berth in a reserved coach). If the railways, with a plethora of such incidents, and with a plethora of judgments thereon, wishes to agitate or argue to the contrary, then it is reasonable and apt to require and expect it to explicitly and unequivocally state its policy apropos safety and security of person and hand-held baggage in running train. The passenger - consumer should be made aware thereof ab initio, and not be put to harassment and difficulty, uncertainty and helplessness, (only) after such incident of loss or injury.
We would, here, like to draw attention to the wide meaning of 'unfair trade practice' as defined in section 2 (1) (r) of the Act 1986. We are consciously refraining, at this stage, in this instant case, to enter explicitly into the domain of unfair trade practice, as we feel, in the present context, that advice for systemic improvements for future would albeit meet the desired ends. Accordingly, we find it necessary and appropriate to request the chief executive of the railways to look into its laws, rules and policy in respect of safety and security of person and hand-held baggage in running train and be forthright and explicit ab initio with the ordinary passengers - consumers. We also find it necessary and appropriate to request that its officers down-the-line be instructed on its policy in respect of agitating such cases in consumer fora (here, in this case, we find that the railways agitated, unsuccessfully, in one, two, three, consumer fora, unnecessarily wasting public time and monies). A report-in-compliance to this Commission within three months will be appreciated.
The revision petition is dispose of with directions as contained in paras 10 and 14 above.
A copy of this Order be sent to the chief executive of the railways by the Registry within ten days.