Orissa

Cuttak

CC/148/2015

Niranjan Kumar Sena - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Claim Officer,East Coast Railway - Opp.Party(s)

N P Patra

10 Aug 2017

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

                                                                                    C.C. No.148/2015

            Niranjan Kumar Sena,

At:Trilochanpur,PO:Mohajanpur,

Via:Bahugram,P.S:Jagatpur,

Dist:Cuttack.                                                                       … Complainant.

 

                Vrs.

 

1.      East Coast Railway

     Represented through its Chief Claim mOfficer,

     East Coast Railway,

     Bhubaneswar,Dist:Khurda.

 

2.        Chief Parcel Supervisor,

East Coast Railway,Cuttack.                                             … Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,LL.B. President.

Sri Bichitra Nanda Tripathy, Member.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:    16.12.2015

Date of Order:  10.08.2017

 

For the complainant:           Mr.N.P.Patra,Adv. & Associates.

For Opp.Parties 1 & 2:         Mr. A.K.Sahoo,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

 

The complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and has prayed for relief against them in terms of his prayer in the complaint petition.

1. The case of the complainant stated in brief is that the son of the complainant who was working as an engineer of ITDP,Cem India Ltd. was transferred from Delhi to Ratnagiri in the State of Maharashtra.  On 9.6.2015 the complainant booked 11 GP bundles at Railway station, New Delhi vide consignment No.LT 4000177285 dt.09.06.2015 by depositing the prescribed luggage fees of Rs.3683 and those G.P.bundles were to be delivered at Cuttack.  Household articles booked under consignment have been described under Schedule-A of the complaint petition.  He along with his daughter-in-law also returned to Cuttack by the same Purusottam Express train on that day.  Annexure-1 is the copy of the parcel way bill filed in this case.
2. On 11.6.15, the Railway authorities did not deliver the parcels to the complainant and ultimately they were shifted to Puri.  On 13.6.15 the O.Ps delivered only 7 out of 11 bundles to the complainant.  Thereafter the complainant approached O.P.2 to hand over him the four parcels which were undelivered.  The articles contained in those four missing packages were all costly household items and the approximate value of those items would be Rs.1,30,000/-.
3. After lapse of about 1 month when the lost articles were not delivered to the complainant, he wrote an application on 29.7.15 to the O.Ps claiming compensation of Rs.1.00 lakh due to the loss caused to him for non-delivery of those articles.  Thereafter he also wrote another letter dt.14.8.15 to O.P.1 for the same purpose but both the O.Ps remained silent.  Lastly on 7.10.15 the O.P.2 issued a shortage certificate.  The copy of the claim application dt.29.7.15 and copy of his letter dt.14.8.15 have been filed and marked as Annexure-2 & 3 respectively.  Annexure-4 is the copy of the application of O.P.2 and Annexure-5 is the copy of the shortage certificate issued by him to the complainant.  The total loss sustained by the complainant with detailed particulars has been described in Schedule-B of the complaint petition.  It is held that the O.Ps are deficient in rendering service to him for which he incurred such a heavy loss.  The complainant has prayed for payment of Rs.1,70,000/-to him in total as described in Schedule-B including compensation of Rs.50,000/- in the interest of justice.
4. Both the O.Ps entered appearance and filed written version of their case taking a plea of denial that they were guilty of deficiency in service rendered to the complainant as alleged.  At the outset they have taken their stand in the written version challenging the jurisdiction of this Forum to entertain the complaint case and to hear and to dispose of the same.  It is categorically stated that U/S-13 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act,1987 the jurisdiction of this Forum or  any Civil Court or any other Claims Tribunal is barred for entertaining any case to award compensation for loss,destruction,damage,deterioration or non-delivery of any goods or animals entrusted to a Railway Administration for carriage by railway.  It is also stated that Sec-15 of the said Act bars jurisdiction of any court or other authorities to exercise any jurisdiction power or authority in relation to the matters referred to sub-Sec-1 of Section-13 of that Act.  In that view of the matter it is fairly stated that the complaint petition filed before this Forum does not merit consideration and the appropriate authority to deal with such matter is the Railway Claims Tribunal for Redressal of the grievances of the complainant.
5. It is further stated that while booking the consignment under Luggage Ticket no.4000177285 dt.9.6.15 ex. Delhi to Cuttack, the complainant has not reflected the value of the consignment and not paid the percentage charges as required U/S-103(2) of Railway Act,1989.  Accordingly the claim of the complainant was settled on weight basis @ Rs.100/- per Kg.  The total weight of the missing luggage came to 55 Kg. and accordingly compensation of Rs.5,500/- has already been paid to the complainant by the O.Ps vide cheque No.935109 dt.13.4.16 and cheque no.935217 dt.5.5.16.  The O.Ps have also filed certain documents relevant for the purpose of this case which have been marked as Annexure-A,B & C respectively.

In that view of the matter it is submitted that the present complaint petition is not worth considering for the reasons stated above and may be dismissed with cost.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant as well as the O.Ps at length and gone through the documents filed by the respective parties.  During course of argument, the learned counsel for the O.Ps has drawn our attention to a decision of the Hon’ble State C.D.R.Commission,Cuttack reported in 2005(I) OLR (CSR) 34 (General Manager, South Eastern Railway and others Vrs. V.Venugopal Reddy).  In the said case it has been held by his Lordship Justice R.K.Patra, the then President that any claim against Railway Administration for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods can only be decided by the Claims Tribunal constituted under Railway Claims Tribunal Act,1987 and the jurisdiction of any other court or Forum to enquire into or determine the claims relating to the matters is taken away.
7. In view of the ratio of the decision stated above and in absence of any submission made by the learned counsel for the complainant to the contrary, it is held that this Forum lacks jurisdiction to deal with the present case.  Accordingly it is ordered;

ORDER

                                The case of the complainant be and the same is dismissed on contest.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble President in the Open Court on this the 10^th    day of August,2017 under the seal and signature of this Forum.

                                                                                                                                                  

    (   Sri D.C.Barik )

                                                                                                                      President.

                                                                                                                  (Sri B.N.Tripathy )

                                                                                                                       Member.

                                                                                                            (Smt. Sarmistha Nath)

                           Member(W)