PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Complaint No.- 127/2024

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. SadanandaTripathy, Member,

Pramod Kumar Juadi,

S/o-Late Bhubaneswar Juadi,

R/o-Sangramal, Katudihi, Po-Sangramal, Ps-Sason Dist-Sambalpur-768200,

At Present HQ-119, BN BSF, PO-Khasiamangal, Ps-Teliamura,

Dist-Khowai, Tripura-799205.                                          ……….......Complainant.

Vrs.

1. Chief Parcel Supervisor, Kharagpur, South Eastern Railway, Kharagpur,

PaschimMedinipur, Dist-West Bengal-721301.

2. Deputy Chief Commercial Manager/Claims,

S.E. Railway/HQ, 11, Garden Reach, NAB 2^nd Floor, Kolkata-43                                                                                  .…....……….Opp. Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant         :- Sri. P.K.Kar & Associates
2. For the O.P.s                       :- Sri. A.Nayak, Addl. Govt. Counsel

Date of Filing:08.04.2024,  Date of Hearing :13.08.2024,  Date of Judgement :07.10.2024

Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

1. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant on 11.03.2024 booked parcels(7nos) having household goods vide PNB No. 2019-641053 from Agartala to Kharagpur by paying freight charges Rs. 938/-. On 14.03.2024 when Complainant went to Kharagpur station only received 3 No.s of parcel out of 7 percels. Complainant after returning to his village sangramal, Sambalpur raised compliant in CPGRAMS portal of Railway vide regd. No MORLY/E/2024/0007931 dated 21.03.2024 but the status is showing  “case closed” dated 27.03.2024.

The parcels was having Sambalpuri Saree of Rs. 12,000/-, Matress pillows Rs. 4000/- valuable clothes Rs. 15000/- and Kitchen accessories Rs. 5000/- besides other items. Being aggrieved complaint was filed.

2. The O.Ps in reply submitted that the Complainant booked 133.4Kg weight household goods vide PNB No. 2019-614503 from Agartala to Kharagpur by paying freight charges Rs. 938/- in owner risk. The Complainant not declared the value of consignment note dated 11.03.2024. As per section 64 of the Indian Railways Act, 1989 the O.Ps are not liable for the damages. The address given by Complainant is wrong. Complainant received 3 no.s of parcel weighing 66 kgs. The consignment of other 4 parcels are 67.4 KG approximately.

Complaint was made by Complainant on 21.03.2024. The Complaint was disposed off on 26.03.2024 to lodge claim before appropriate authority i.e. Dy.CCM/claim SER. The Complaint forwarded the reply to Dy.C.C.M. on 04.04.2024. The Complainant not submitted affidavit format for consignment having value below Rs. 50,000/-. The Complainant declared the parcel value below Rs. 5000/-. As per section 103 of the Railways Act, 1989 the liability shall not exceed the amount prescribed.

Claim is maintainable before Civil Court/Claims Commission under the Railways Act, 1989. DCDRC, Sambalpur has no jurisdiction. The complaint is liable to be rejected.

3. The Complainant filed the consignment note below Rs. 5000/-. Due slip dated 14.03.2024 showing non delivery of 4 parcels household goods due weight 67.4 Kgs, grievance through mail dated 21.03.2024, complaint registered vide complaint No. MORLY/E/2024/0007931 dated 21.03.2024, letter dated 26.03.2024 of Sr. Divisional Commercial Manager, Kharagpur complaint dated 03.04.2024 & 04.04.2024.
4. After perusal of the pleadings of the parties and documents it is observed that the O.Ps challenged the jurisdiction of the Commission. Under the Indian Railways Act, 1989 the Railways claim Tribunal has been established and it is not possible for the Complainant to move to Kharagpur for Railways claim. It is admitted by the O.Ps that 4 parcels weighing 67.4Kgs consignment has not been received/ delivered to the Complainant. For delivery of goods the O.Ps have received Rs. 938/- but failed to deliver the goods. It amounts to deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps. Where there is deficiency in service the Consumer Commission has jurisdiction in addition to special laws for the purpose i.e. the Indian Railways Act, 1989 has no overriding effect on the C.P. Act, 2019. As per section 100 of the C.P. Act, 2019, this Commission has jurisdiction.
5. From the consignment receipt it reveals that the Complainant has declared value of the goods below Rs. 5000/- only 66Kgs household goods have been delivered. The rest 67.4Kgs weight parcels have been lost by the O.Ps. Accordingly, the complainant is only entitled for the value of goods declared and lost i.e. about Rs. 3000/-. The O.Ps are liable to pay the value of the goods. Complaints were made on 21.03.2024 and it was closed on 27.03.2024. The Complainant could not get justice/redressed by the O.Ps which amounts to deficiency in service.

Taking into consideration the circumstances of the case following order is passed:

ORDER

The complaint is allowed on contest against the O.Ps. The O.Ps are directed to pay value of the lost goods amounting to Rs. 3000/- with compensation Rs. 40,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs. 10,000/- within one month of this order. In case of non-payment the entire amount will cover 12% interest P.A. w.e.f. 21.03.2024 till realisation.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07^th day of Oct. 2024.

Supply free copies to the parties.