V. RAJASHEKAR, ASST. COMMERCIAL SUPERINTENDENT vs K.N.PRATAP KUMAR

THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 26.3.1991 passed by the District Forum, Bangalore in Complaint No. 457/1990 on its file.

IT arises in this way : - The appellant was the opposite party and the respondent was the complainant before the District Forum and they will be referred to as such hereafter. On 21.8.1990, the respondent was travelling from New Delhi to Bangalore by Karnataka Express train. He had four pieces of luggage consisting of two cartons, one VIP brief case and one hand bag. He got them weighed at the New Delhi Railway Station. They were found to weigh 70 kgs and a slip was given to him as per exhibit A1(a). He delivered it to the official at the counter who issued him the receipt as per exhibit A1. Exhibit R-1 is the copy of that receipt given to the complainant. The complainant paid Rs. 100/- as per that receipt. On the way at Hindupur, the Asstt. Commercial Superintendent of the opposite party got the luggage of the complainant weighed. IT was found to weight 90 kgs. On the request of the complainant his luggage was again weighed at the platform of Railway Station at Bangalore, and it was found to weigh 90 kgs. Since the said weight of the luggage was in excess of the weight said to have been booked at New Delhi, a sum of Rs. 812/- was collected from the complainant in accordance with rules. According to the complainant, he was penalised due to the fault of the New Delhi Railway Station Authorities. Hence he filed a complaint before the District Forum for recovery of Rs. 812/- collected from him as penal charges. The opposite party resisted the complaint by contending inter-alia that there was no mistake in weighing at New Delhi; that the complainant must not have given all his articles for weighment at New Delhi that the complainant must have added some more articles on the way and that the collection of Rs. 812/- as penal charges is proper.

Both parties did not adduce any oral evidence. On the material produced by the parties, the President of the District Forum held that the levy of penal charges was proper and in accordance with rules and dismissed the complaint. The other two members held that as the possibility of an honest mistake on the part of the official who weighed the articles at New Delhi cannot be ruled out, the Railways are entitled to collect luggage charges for the excess 20 kgs at the normal rates and directed the opposite party to refund the balance collected from the complainant with interest at 11% p.a. from the date of collection till the date of payment. Being aggrieved by the majority order of the District Forum, the opposite party has preferred this appeal.

AS both the parties had not adduced any evidence before the District Forum, we thought it proper to allow both parties to adduce evidence in support of their contentions. Hence, AW1 was examined on behalf of the appellant and Exhibits A1 & A2 were produced. RW1 examined on behalf of the Respondent and exhibit R1 was produced. Mr. Venugopala Gowda, Learned Government Pleader for the appellant urged that as AW 1 has sworn that he correctly weighed the luggage of the complainant on that day, his evidence may be accepted especially as there is possibility of the complainant giving less article for weighment at New Delhi or adding some more articles on the way and so the Order of the President of the District Forum may be confirmed. On the other hand, Mr. Sowri Raju, Learned Counsel for the respondent urged that the respondent who is a student has no reason to give false evidence and so his evidence may be accepted and the Order of the majority members of the District Forum may be confirmed.

IT is not disputed that 4 articles of the complainant were weighed at New Delhi Railway Station and that they were found to weigh 70 kgs by AW1. IT is also not disputed that the said articles'' were found to weigh at 90 kgs at Hindupur and at Bangalore Railway Stations. In view of the difference in the weigh t between the weighment at New Delhi and weighment at Bangalore, the following three possibilities follow : - (a) that there might have been an honest mistake on the part of the AW1 in correctly reading the weight at New Delhi Railway Station; (b) that the complainant might have added some more articles on the way to his luggage; (c) that the complainant might not have got all his luggage weighed at New Delhi Railway Station.

The complainant has sworn as RW1 that he did not add any other articles to his luggage on the way and that he gave all his articles for weighment at New Delhi Railway Station. He is a student and he has no reason to cook up a false version for the sake of saving the charges for 20 kgs of articles. AW1 was fair enough to admit that there is possibility of an honest mistake in recording the weighment on some occasions. He has no doubt stated that he did not make any mistake in recording the weighment of the articles of complainant. But in view of his admission mat there is possibility of an honest mistake and as the complainant has sworn that he got all his articles weighed and that he did not add any more articles on the way and as there is no reason to disbelieve RW1, we are inclined to refer that AW 1 must have made an honest mistake in reading the weight of the luggage of the complainant. If that is so, the complainant could have been charged at the normal rates at New Delhi Railway Station for those 20 kgs also. So deducting the charges of the 20 kgs, the complainant is entitled to refund of the balance amount collected from him at Bangalore. So the order of the majority members of the District Forum, is proper, although not for the reasons stated by them. As the railway officials at Bangalore have collected the amount as per rules acting bona fide, we feel that it is not proper to award any interest on the said sum. In the result, the Order of the District Forum is modified by directing the appellant to pay Rs. 752/- to the respondent within one month from today. Under the circumstances, we direct the parties to bear their own costs. Order modified.