Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/424/2011

T.V. Subba Rao - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Commercial Manager - Opp.Party(s)

M.V. Seetharamayya

31 Dec 2014

ORDER

Reg.of the Complaint:09-11-2011

                                                                                                                                 Date of Order:31-12-2014 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II

AT VISAKHAPATNAM

                   Present:

1.Sri H.ANANDHA RAO, M.A., L.L.B.,

       President

2.Sri C.V.RAO, M.A., B.L.,

                                             Male Member

3.Smt.K.SAROJA, M.A., B.L.,

       Lady Member

 

 

WEDNESDAY, THE 31^ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014

CONSUMER CASE NO.424/2011

BETWEEN:

 

T.V.SUBBA RAO S/O LATE PEDDAYYA,

HINDU, AGED 45 YEARS, PROPRIETOR,

SRI SESHADRI RUBBER STAMP WORKS,

JAGANNADHAPURAM, NEAR KUMMARAVEEDHI BRIDGE,

AKKAYYAPALEM MAIN ROAD, VISAKHAPATNAM-16.

 

…COMPLAINANT

AND:

1.CHIEF COMMERCIAL MANAGER

PERSON AUTHORIED TO RECEIVE CLAIMS,

ECO. RAILWAYS, WALTAIR, VISAKHAPATNAM.

 

2.THE CHIEF PARCEL SUPERVISOR,

S.E.C.RAILWAYS, SADAN, SAMANTH VIHAR,

CHANDRASEKHARPUR, BHUBANESWAR-751 017.

…OPPOSITE PARTIES

This case coming on 24-12-2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of SRI M.V.SEETHARAMAYYA, Advocate for the Complainant and SRI C.S.R.M. Opposite Parties 1 & 2  and 3^rd Opposite Party, remained exparte and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following.

 

ORDER

(As per the Honourable President on behalf of the Bench)

1.     The Complainant filed the present complaint against the Opposite Parties, directing them to award Rs.95,000/- towards gross negligence and deficiency in service and causing mental tension with interest @ 24% p.a., from 17-02-2011 with costs.

2.     The case of the complainant in brief is that, he purchased Rs.45,045/- of raw material  items and articles relating to making of Rubber Stamps vide bill No.105 dated 17-12-2011 of Maa Ambey Enterprises, Station Road,  Raipur and one packing parcel containing the aforesaid case were booked vide receipt no.14A.881444 dated 17-02-2011 by the Chief Parcel Supervisor, S.E.C. Railways, Raipur to take delivery at his destination that is the Visakhapatnam for which they charged Rs.32/- towards transportation charges but since 19-02-2011 onwards, he continuously roamed around the parcel office at Visakhapatnam about his parcel but in vain in proof of his visits, he obtained initials from persons in-charge of the said parcel office at Visakhapatnam but every time, it was informed that the parcel has not been received from Raipur.

3.     That on instructions of the present in-charge of the parcel office of Visakhapatnam, he made a detailed complaint in the form prescribed dated 08-04-2011 and sent the same by registered post to Chief Parcel Supervisor Raipur and on that the OP3 asked to supply the original Railway parcel and claimed bill to take further action at his end and in spite of submitting the same, no action was taken.

4.     As seen from the over leaf of the Railway parcel, it was written that, the complainant has to approach the Chief Commercial Manager or person authorized to receive claims of the Railways, the destination station and hence, he also made a written complaint by registered but there is was no action and as there is no action taken, he got issued a Registered Lawyer Notice to all the OPs but none of the OPs responded, hence, this complaint.

5.     The 1^st Opposite Party filed its counter and the same is adopted by the 2^nd OP, strongly resisted the claim of the complainant. They admitted that the complainant booked the parcel from Chief Parcel Supervisor of Raipur with a direction to deliver the same. As could be seen from the Railway receipt no.881444 dated 17-02-2011 and as per section 103 of Railway Act one should declare that the value of the consignment at the time of taking of the consignment to the Railway Administration so as to enable them  to fix the percentage of charges to the Railway Authorities in addition to normal freight charges to claim full value of the consignment but in the instant case, the complainant did not do so. Complaint filed by the complainant shall not come under the purview of Consumer Protection Act and as per Section 13,15, and 24, Railway Claims Tribunals Act alone have jurisdiction to try this case. For these reasons, the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable. Therefore, it is liable to be dismissed.

6.     The case of the 3^rd OP is that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain this compliant and the matter in dispute covers only Railway Claims Tribunal. For these reasons, the complaint is dismissed.

7.     The prove the case of the complainant, he filed Evidence Affidavit and got marked Exhibits A1 to A14 and the 1^st OP filed Evidence Affidavit and got marked Exhibits B1 and B2.

8.     Exhibit A1 is the Cash Bill for Rs.45,045/- issued by Maa Ambey Enterprises dated 17-02-2011, Exhibit A2 is the copy of Railway Parcel Receipt No.14.A.881444 for Rs.32/- dated 17-02-2011, Exhibit A3 is the copy of Railway Parcel Receipt No.14.A.881444 for Rs.32/- dated 17-02-2011, Exhibit A4 is the letter by the complainant to the OPs, dated 08-04-2011, Exhibit A5 is the complaint to Chief Commercial Manager E.Co.Railways, Waltair with necessary enclosures, Exhibit A6 is the Receipts of R.Ls made to all concerned, Exhibit A7 is the Lawyers Notice, dated 14-05-2011, Exhibit A8 is the letter addressed to complainant asking original Railway Receipt claim etc., by Dy.Chief Commercial Manager, Claims, Bhabaneswar, Exhibit A9 is the Original dispatch vide R.L.No.1256 dated 29-06-2011, Exhibit A10 is the reminder with Xerox copies of already made correspondence to Bhubaneswar Dy.Chief Commercial, Manager, Exhibit A11 is the letter from the O/o Chief Commissioner Manager, Bhubaneswar to the Complainant dated 24-11-2011, Exhibit A12 is the Xerox copy of cheque dated 23-11-2011, Exhibit A13 is the ECS Mandate Form dated 28-11-2011 duly signed by the Complainant, Exhibit A14 is the letter from the Complainant to the 3^rd OP, dated 28-11-2011.

9.     Exhibit B1 is the copy of forwarding bill of 2^nd OP, dated 28-11-2011 and Exhibit B2 is the forwarding notice of 2^nd OP, dated 28-11-2011.

10.    Both parties filed their respective Written arguments.

11.    Heard both sides.

12.    In view of the respective contentions raised by either side, the point that would arise for determination in this case is;

Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the OPs and the complainant is entitled to any reliefs asked for?

13.    The main contention of the complainant is that he booked parcel consignment at Raipur Railway Station on            17-02-2011 vide LR.No.14A 881444 dated 17-02-2011 to Visakhapatnam and that it did not reach the destination station and he claims Rs.44,045/-being the cost of the contents of the parcel and other reliefs.  The case of the OP is that this forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate this complaint.

14.    It is a fact that the complainant has booked a parcel on 17-02-2011 at Raipur Railway Station vide noted Exhibits. But, as per Section 103 of Railway Act, the complainant should declare the value of the consignment at the time of booking which enables the Railway Administration to fix the percentage of Freight charges to be paid based on the value of the consignment in addition to the normal freight charges and this enables the complainant to claim the full value of the consignment in case of loss. But, in the instant case, admittedly, the complaint has not declared the value of the consignment which bars him from claiming the amount.

15.    Now, coming to the point of jurisdiction, it is a fact that a Railway Claims Tribunal has been constituted by the Railway Claims Tribunal Act 1987 for enquiring into and determining the claims against the Railway Administration for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animal or goods entrusted to it to be carried by Railway etc., and for matters concerned therewith or incidental thereto. Section 13 of the said act deals with the Jurisdiction and Section 15 of the same Act bars the jurisdiction of any other court or authority to exercise any jurisdiction powers or authority in relation to the matters referred to in Section 13. The present complaint is filed u/s 13(1) (a) (i) of RCT Act which deals with the compensation for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of goods entrusted to Railways and as such, the Railway Claims Tribunal alone has the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.

16.    Moreover, as per Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, also envisages that the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act shall apply to all claims, except the claims in respect of which corresponding remedies of judicial nature are available under any special law for the time being in force. It was held in a decision rendered by the Honourable National Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in the case of Union Bank of India and others vs. Ramjee Enterprises and another in FA 411/96 dated 26-09-2001.

18.    For these reasons, we are of the considered view that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable. Therefore, it is liable to be dismissed.

19.   In this result, this complaint is dismissed, no costs.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, on this the 31^st day of December, 2014.

 

    Sd/-                                                   Sd/-                                                       Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                                 M.MEMBER                                                 PRESIDENT

 

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Exhibits Marke for the Complainants:

Exhibits	Date	Description	Remarks
A-1	17-02-2011	Cash Bill for Rs.45,045/- issued by Maa Ambey Enterprises	Photostat copy
A-2	17-02-2011	Railway Parcel Receipt No.14.A.881444 for Rs.32/-	Photostat copy
A-3	17-02-2011	Railway Parcel Receipt No.14.A.881444 for Rs.32/-	Photostat copy
A-4	08-04-2011	Exhibit A4 is the letter by the complainant to the OPs, dated 08-04-2011,	Photostat copy
A-5	08-04-2011	Exhibit A5 is the complaint to Chief Commercial Manager E.Co.Railways, Waltair with necessary enclosures	Photostat copy
A-6	08-04-2011	Receipts OF R.Ls  made to all concerned	Photostat copy
A-7	14-05-2011	Laywer’s notice	Photostat copy
A-8	05-05-2011	Letter addressed to the complainant asking original Railway Receipt claim etc., by Dy.Chief Commercial Manager, Claims, Bhubaneswar	Photostat copy
A-9	29-06-2011	Dispatch vide R.L.No.125	Original
A-10	13-09-2011	Reminder to Bhubaneswar Dy.Chief Commercial Manager	Photostat copy
A-11	24-11-2011	letter from the O/o Chief Commissioner Manager, Bhubaneswar to the Complainant	Photostat copy
A-12	23-11-2011	Cheque	Photostat copy
A-13	28-11-2011	ECS Mandate Form duly signed by the Complainant,	Photostat copy
A-14	28-11-2011	letter from the Complainant to the 3rd OP. Police Complaint	Photostat copy

 

Exhibits Marked for the OPs

Exhibits	Date	Description	Remarks
B-1	28-11-2011	forwarding bill of 2nd OP	Photostat copy
B-2	28-11-2011	forwarding notice of 2nd OP	Photostat copy

 

    Sd/-                                           Sd/-                                                        Sd/-

LADY MEMBER                                 M.MEMBER                                                 PRESIDENT