State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Union Of India Through The Deputy ... vs Dr. Sunil Kumar Upadhyay, on 14 October, 2011
Daily Order
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION BIHAR, PATNA RAJY AAYOG (First. Floor), R. Block Rd. No.-2, Patna-800001 First Appeal No. A/155/2001 (Arisen out of Order Dated null in Case No. of District None) 1. UNION OF INDIA NA BEFORE: HONABLE MR. JUSTICE SUBASH CHANDRA JHA PRESIDENT HON'ABLE MRS. RENU SINHA MEMBER PRESENT: ORDER
Date of order: 14-10-2011 S.C. JHA, PRESIDENT The learned counsel for the appellant appears. Respondent also appears in person.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent have been heard.
3. This appeal is directed against the order dated 26-12-2000 passed in Consumer Complaint No. 270/1999 by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Patna (hereinafter to be referred to as District Forum) whereby and whereunder the learned District Forum has directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 6000/- (Rs. six thousand only) to the complainant as compensation within two months from the receipt of the copy of the order.
4. The brief fact of the case is that the complainant got two berths in AC-3 tier sleeper for himself and his daughter in 3232 Dn from Patna Junction to Howrah Junction by purchasing ticket No. 01640095, which was confirmed for journey on 04-02-1999 but on the date of journey, AC-3 tier coach, was not attached with the train. The case of the complainant was that his daughter had to appear in Kolkatta for admission in the NIFT on 06-02-1999 and 07-02-1999. The complainant approached the Railway authorities and requested them to make necessary arrangement for their journey but they could not make any arrangement. The complainant and his daughter were put to a great mental agony and physical harassment. Lastly they had to go to Kolkatta by air.
5. The appellant-O.Ps. appeared before the District Forum and filed show cause admitting the fact that the AC-3 tier coach was not attached with the train on the date of journey of the complainant but the complaint is barred under Section-13 of the Railway Tribunal Act and as per Para-306 of IRCA coaching traffic No.24, Part-I, Volume-I, Railway Administration do not guarantee for reserved accommodation and accordingly the complainant is not entitled to any relief.
6. After hearing both the parties, the learned District Forum has passed the order as mentioned in Paragraph-3 of this order.
7. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of the learned District Forum, the Opposite Party-Railway has come in appeal mainly on the ground that the District Forum has not taken into consideration the relevant provision as laid down under Sections-51 and 52 with the relevant rule made for this purpose under IRCA Traffic No.Pt-1 No.306. There is also complete bar of jurisdiction under Section-13 and 15 of the Railway Claim Tribunal Act,1987 and the matter has already been settled by the Hon'ble National Commission in Revision Petition No.197 of 1992.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent, who appeared in person.
9. We have gone through their papers, written notes of argument and considered their argument in the context of the relevant papers and documents available on the record. From the aforesaid materials on the record, it is admitted fact that the ticket in question was purchased by the respondent from Patna Junction to Kolkatta to carry journey in 3232 Dn train on 04-02-1999, which was also admitted by the Railway, by filing show cause in the District Forum.
10. The learned counsel for the appellant while arguing the case, has admitted that on the date of journey of the respondent and his daughter were not provided AC-3 tier coach, which was not attached with the train and as such, the respondent and his daughter could not carry on their journey, with the result that the daughter of the respondent could not appear in the examination on 06/07-02-1999 at Kolkatta.
11. The learned District Forum has considered the legal aspect of the matter and analyzed his conclusion that the Railway Administration was deficient in providing service, with the result that the respondent had to suffer mental, physical agony and financial loss. Of course, there was return of the ticket but that was not considered genuine for such compensation. So, we are not inclined to interference in the impugned order of the learned District Forum.
12. The order stands confirmed and the appeal, in the result, is hereby dismissed. The order should be complied within 60 days from today, failing which interest @ 10% per annum shall be realized from them. [HONABLE MR. JUSTICE SUBASH CHANDRA JHA] PRESIDENT [HON'ABLE MRS. RENU SINHA] MEMBER