Order No.  25  dt.  16/05/2018

                The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant purchased tickets from o.p. for the journey from Indoor to Howrah boarding at Bhopal. The complainant was provided with the confirm tickets in 2^nd Class AC compartment of Shipra Express being Train No.22911. On the scheduled date of journey i.e. on 19.2.14 the complainant boarded the train at Bhopal. The complainant put their baggage and belongings at their respective births provided in the compartment of the train. At about 9-30 on the next date the complainant noticed that the hand bag of his wife had lost. The complainant informed the said fact to the TTE and he informed the complainant that he will get down at the next station and send the GRP to register the complaint at the next station, but nothing was done and no one turned up at Katni station. When the train reached at Mainak the complainant contacted the RPF and the complainant was informed that at Satna one constable will attend the coach and register the complaint of the complainant and the complainant also informed the subsequent TTE and he was totally ignorant of the said incident and he failed to produce any complaint book. On the basis of the said fact the complainant after reaching Howrah lodged complaint at GRP, but no fruitful result was achieved for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.p. for compensation of Rs.9 lakhs and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.

                The o.p. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the case is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties and o.p. challenged the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint by this Forum, since the incident took place between Bhopal and Katni railway station which is outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. On the basis of the said fact o.p. no.1 prayed for dismissal of the case. The said incident took place within the territorial jurisdiction of West Central Railway, but the said railway has not been made a party in this case. The alleged loss / theft of the complainant’s personal belongings took place due to negligence on the part of o.p. or its employees and the complainant is not entitled for any compensation as per the provision of Sec 100 of the Railways Act. On the basis of the said fact o.p. prayed for dismissal of the case.

                On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:

1. Whether the complainant lost his articles during the time of journey?
2. Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.p.?
3. Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons:

                All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.

                Ld. lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant purchased tickets from o.p. for the journey from Indoor to Howrah boarding at Bhopal. The complainant was provided with the confirm tickets in 2^nd Class AC compartment of Shipra Express being Train No.22911. On the scheduled date of journey i.e. on 19.2.14 the complainant boarded the train at Bhopal. The complainant put their baggage and belongings at their respective births provided in the compartment of the train. At about 9-30 on the next date the complainant noticed that the hand bag of his wife had lost. The complainant informed the said fact to the TTE and he informed the complainant that he will get down at the next station and send the GRP to register the complaint at the next station, but nothing was done and no one turned up at Katni station. When the train reached at Mainak the complainant contacted the RPF and the complainant was informed that at Satna one constable will attend the coach and register the complaint of the complainant and the complainant also informed the subsequent TTE and he was totally ignorant of the said incident and he failed to produce any complaint book. On the basis of the said fact the complainant after reaching Howrah lodged complaint at GRP, but no fruitful result was achieved for which the complainant filed this case praying for direction upon the o.p. for compensation and litigation cost.

                Ld. lawyer for the o.p. argued that the case is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties and o.p. challenged the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint by this Forum, since the incident took place between Bhopal and Katni railway station which is outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. On the basis of the said fact o.p. no.1 prayed for dismissal of the case. The said incident took place within the territorial jurisdiction of West Central Railway, but the said railway has not been made a party in this case. The alleged loss / theft of the complainant’s personal belongings took place due to negligence on the part of o.p. or its employees and the complainant is not entitled for any compensation as per the provision of Sec 100 of the Railways Act. On the basis of the said fact o.p. prayed for dismissal of the case.

                Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that during the journey in Shipra Express between Bhopal and Katni the theft took place. The complainant has alleged that he tried to lodge the complaint at different station, but those were not entertained and ultimately he lodged the complaint at Howrah station and the complainant has emphasized that due to gross negligence on the part of the employee of o.p. the said incident took place. The o.p. has emphatically argued that no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. Apart from the said fact West Central Railway has not been made a party in this case. Ld. lawyer for o.p. has also relied on the decision in respect of revision petition no.650/2015 passed by Hon’ble National Commission whereby it was held that as per Sec 100 of Railways Act, 1989 which states as follows:- “Responsibility has carrier of luggage – Railway administration shall not be responsible for the loss, destruction, damage, deterioration of non delivery of any luggage unless a railway servant booked the luggage and given receipt, therefore in case of luggage which carried by the passenger in his charge, unless it is also proved that the loss, destruction, damage or deterioration was due to the negligence or misconduct on its part or on the part of any of its servant”.

                The complainant could not produce any documentary evidence to show that there was any negligent act on the part of the employees of railway, therefore as per Sec 100 of Railways Act the o.p. cannot be held responsible for the loss sustained by the complainant. On the basis of the said fact we hold that the evidence adduced by the complainant does not inspire confidence in our mind that there was any negligence or default on the part of the railway for which railway can be held responsible for the loss sustained by the complainant. Apart from the said fact, no cause of action for the case arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. On the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case since the case filed by the complainant is riddled with so many defects, therefore we hold that the case filed by the complainant has got no merit and the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.

                Hence, ordered,

                That the CC No.80/2016 is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.p.