JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER

1.      Our attention has been invited towards Section 15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.  The same is reproduced as follows:

“15. Bar of jurisdiction.- On and from the appointed day, no court or other authority shall have, or be entitled to, exercise any jurisdiction, powers or authority in relation to the matters referred to in [sub-sections(1) and (1A) of Section 13.”

 Sub-sections (1) and (1A) of Section 13 of the Act are also produced hereunder:-

“13. Jurisdiction, powers and authority of Claims Tribunal.- (1) The Claims Tribunal shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, all such jurisdiction, powers and authority as were exercisable immediately before that date by any civil court or a Claims Commissioner appointed under the provisions of the Railways Act,-

(a)  relating to the responsibility of the railway administrations as carriers under Chapter VII of the Railways Act in respect of claims for-

(i)           Compensation for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods entrusted to a railway administration for carriage by railway;

(ii)          Compensation payable under section 82A of the Railways Act or the rules made thereunder; and

(b)  in respect of the claims for refund of fares or part thereof or for refund of any freight paid in respect of animals or goods entrusted to a railway administration to be carried by railway.

(1A) The Claims Tribunal shall also exercise, on and from the date of commencement of the provisions of section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989 (24 of 1989), all such jurisdiction, powers and authority as were exercisable immediately before that date by any civil court in respect of claims for compensation now payable by the railway administration under section 124A of the said Act or the rules made thereunder.”

2.      The case of the complainant is that he is regular season ticket passenger in the opposite party’s train from Thiruvananthapuram Station to Kanyakumari by using season ticket vide train No. 1082 Jayanthi Janatha, Kanyakumari – Mumbai.  On 31.7.2001 the complainant was travelling from Thiruvananthapuram to Kanyakumari as usual.  He was sitting on the side seat near the window of the train and when the train reached near Kaniyapuram at about 7.45 A. M., the shutter of the window which was raised and locked suddenly slipped down and it fell on the right hand of the complainant causing serious injury to the right hand and finger of the complainant.  The blood started oozing out of the wound.  The complainant remained unconscious.  He took treatment from Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram.  Due to this accident, the complainant’s ¾ portion of tip crushed of.  The small finger was removed by the doctors of the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. 

3.      The District Forum dismissed the complaint but the State Commission allowed the appeal and granted a compensation of
Rs.40,000/- with interest @12% per annum from the date of the complaint.  The State Commission also directed that if the opposite party disobeyed to carry out this order, the complainant will also be entitled to get Rs.5,000/- as costs of proceedings to the complainant.

4.      In view of the law stated above, we are of the considered view that this complaint lies with the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal.  There lies a rub and we cannot entertain this complaint.  Therefore, the complaint is dismissed.  The order of the State Commission is set aside.  There shall be no order as to costs.  The permission  is  given  to  the  petitioner  to  approach  the  appropriate forum and he can seek help from the decision in case of Laxmi Engineering Works vs. P.S. G. Industrial Institute 1995 (3) SCC 583 so far as the point of limitation is concerned.

The revision petition is accordingly allowed.