Order No. 22 dt. 21/09/2017
The case of the complainants in brief is that the complainant no.1 after visiting Puri with his family while they were returning from Puri on 11.12.11 the train started at 8-15 p.m. It was a 3 tier sleeper class compartment. During the journey the complainants noticed that there was no railway official or security men (GRP / RPF) attended the coach till it reached Howrah Station at early in the next morning. The tickets were also not checked at all. After 2-3 stations from Puri some unauthorized persons entered the train compartment at about 11-00 p.m. While the train was in running condition the complainants fell asleep. When the train reached at Kharagpur the complainants woke up and found one bag missing. The complainants after reaching Howrah lodged a complaint, but no effective step was taken by o.ps. for which the complainants filed this case praying for direction upon the o.ps. for compensation of Rs.1,95,000/- and litigation cost.
The o.ps. contested this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the complainants while lodged a GD being no.886 dt.12.12.11 with Howrah GRP demanding claim of one camera costing approximately Rs.2000/- and other small gift items which were stolen away by unknown miscreants. The complainants in order to have more claim manufactured that some articles were stolen. The case filed by the complainants is a manufactured one. From the complaint itself it appears that the complainants got only 5 berths for 6 passengers, it means that they had no sufficient berths for each and every passengers and no extra room in the compartment / coach for even taking rest lying on the berth. Under such circumstances one of the complainants may be careful and cautious in protection of their goods which were carrying articles without booking and also why did not they keeping their articles carried under lock and key with chain provided under lower berth whereas they got 2 lower berths. It is not possible for o.ps. to provide security as well as protection to each and every persons during their journey for protection of the articles and since luggage were not booked, therefore o.ps. had no responsibility for the alleged loss sustained by the complainants. In this respect ld. lawyer for o.ps. relied on a decision as reported in 2007(2) CCC 124 (SC) wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in a verdict on false suit as ”One who comes to the court must come with clean hands. We are constrained to say that more often than not, process of the court is being abused. Property grabber, tax evaders, bank loan dodgers and other unscrupulous persons from all walks of life find the court process a convenient lever to retain the illegal gain indefinitely. We have no hesitation to say that a person whose case is based on falsehood has no right to approach the court. He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of litigation”. Here in this case the complainants made false claim against the o.ps. and thereby o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided:
- Whether the complainants availed the train journey from Puri to Howrah on the fateful day?
- Whether there was any theft of luggage of the complainants?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
- 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 complainants argued that the complainants during time of their journey from Puri to Howrah while they fell asleep and before the train entering Kharagpur they noticed that one of their bags was missing. The complainants after coming to know of the said fact lodged a GD at Howrah GRP. It was further stated that during the journey the complainants noticed that no railway staff had ever attended the said coach. Since some unauthorized persons entered the coach the complainants though noticed the said fact, but due to lack of any GRP / RPF the fact of those unauthorized persons could not be brought in to their notice. Since there was negligence on the part of o.ps. the complainants filed this case praying for compensation and other reliefs.
Ld. lawyer for the o.ps. argued that the complainants at the time of filing GD stated that they lost the articles worth of Rs.2000/-, subsequently it was claimed that the articles worth of Rs.25,700/- and in total the complainants claimed the amount of Rs.1,95,000/- and litigation cost. Ld. lawyer for the o.ps further emphasized that since the articles were not booked it is not the responsibility of the railway to compensate the alleged loss sustained by the complainants. Ld. lawyer for the o.ps further emphasized that from the materials on record it is found that the TTE was provided in the said compartment and he had to look after the 3 compartments and it is not believable that ‘the train will run without guard and driver’. The complainants have built up a false manufactured story to establish their false claim. On the basis of he said fact o.ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainants were travelling in Puri – Howrah Express on that date. It is also an admitted fact the complainants got 5 berths and there were 6 passengers, it means that there was no berth for another passenger. Since the complainants were initially in the category of RAC and with the confirmation of the tickets 5 berths, but one passenger was not provided with the berths had the right to travel in the said compartment. On the basis of the said fact the complainants made their journey, the articles were kept under the berths, 2 lower berths were provided with them, but they did not take proper caution in protecting of their goods. They did not book those articles and also the articles were kept under lock and key with chain under the lower berths. From the materials on record it appears that there was negligent act on the part of the complainants. The o.ps. can only be held responsible if the goods are booked, but without booking those goods o.ps. cannot be held responsible. It is not possible for o.ps. to provide security of each and every persons and to provide GRP / RPF for looking after their goods carried at the time of journey. The claim made by the complainant regarding the loss sustained by them at the time of lodging GD was Rs.2000/- and at the time of filing the case it reached to Rs.25,700/-. Moreover, the complainant no.1 being an advocate is fully aware of the benefits enjoyed by a consumer under C.P. Act and by knowing the said provision the complainants inflated their claim and filed this case. in this respect we should rely on a decision as reported in 2007(2) CCC 124 (SC) wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in a verdict on false suit as ”One who comes to the court must come with clean hands. We are constrained to say that more often than not, process of the court is being abused. Property grabber, tax evaders, bank loan dodgers and other unscrupulous persons from all walks of life find the court process a convenient lever to retain the illegal gain indefinitely. We have no hesitation to say that a person, whose case is based on falsehood, has no right to approach the court. He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of litigation”. On the basis of the facts and circumstances as stated above, we hold that the goods which were not booked by the passengers and for the loss of those goods, railway authority cannot be held liable. In case of journey in a sleeper class compartment it is the responsibility of the passengers to take care of their goods. In view of such background of the case and the false claim made by the complainants, we hold that the case filed by the complainants has got no merit and thereby the complainants 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.324/2014 is dismissed on contest without cost against the o.ps.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
