Delhi

StateCommission

A/362/2015

URMILA CHADHA & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

INDIAN RAILWAYS - Opp.Party(s)

19 Dec 2017

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

Date of Decision:19.12.2017

 

First Appeal- 362/2015

(Arising out of the order dated 02.03.2015 passed in Complainant Case No. 653/2013 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (VI), Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi)

 

1. Urmila Chadha,

W/o Sushil Kumar Chadha

 

2.       Sushil Kumar Chadha,

S/o Late Shri R.L. Chadha

 

Both R/o D-3-D, Apartment No.5,

Under Hill Land, Civil Lines,

Delhi-110054.

…..Appellants

 

Versus

Indian Railways with its Regd. Office

Rail Bhawan, Northern Central Sectt.

Opp. Krishi Bhawan, Delhi.

.….Respondent

 

 

CORAM

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

Salma Noor, Member

 

 

 1.     Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

2.      To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

Salma Noor, Member

 

1.                This is an appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed against order dated 2.3.15 passed by the Ld. District Forum-VI, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi in Complaint Case No.653/2013.  The Ld. District Forum has passed an award in favour of the appellants/complainants.  Not satisfied with the awarded amount, the appellants/complainants have prayed for enhancement of the awarded amount.

2.                Briefly facts of the case are that on 18.11.2012, the appellants/complainants boarded Train No.12649 from Yashwant Pur, Bangalore to Hazrat Nizamuddin Station, New Delhi.  They were travelling in Class-2A, Coach No.HA-1 and had a reservation of Seat No.8 & 10.  It is alleged by the appellants/complainants that on the intervening night between 19.11.2012 and 20.11.2012, Mrs. Urmila Chadha, appellant-1/complainant-1 woke up to attend a natural call.  It is alleged by the appellant-1/complainant-1 that when she returned back to her seat, she was shocked to discover that her bag is missing wherein a large number of jewellery including cash of Rs.16,000/- was stolen.  It is further alleged that immediately after that the appellants/complainants sought assistance from the railway staff, Shri V.K. Sharma who was Conductor of the Head Quarters, Jhansi. An FIR had also been registered by the appellants/complainants on account of said theft with the said Conductor.  Further an FIR was also lodged at Police Station, Hazrat Nizamuddin Station, New Delhi on 23.11.2012 bearing No.20120416.  It is alleged by the appellants/complainants that they tried to enquire about the status of the investigation till 29.12.2012, but they could not gain any information regarding the theft.  It is further alleged by the appellants/complainants that only after 29.12.2012, they were informed that their bag was found and was lying with Gonda Railway Police Station since 20.11.2012 i.e. the date of the theft.  Thereafter the appellants/complainants went to Jhansi and upon reaching Jhansi, they discovered that the bag had been completely ransacked and all the valuables, cash, jewellery etc. were removed from the bag.  The police officials asked them to provide them a request of releasing the bag in writing subsequent to which the bag was returned to them.  The copy of the addressed letter to the SHO, Gonda Railway Police, Jhansi was filed.  It is alleged by the appellants/complainants that they have suffered financial loss to the tune of R.5 lacs which was the estimated cost of the articles stolen from the train compartment during their journey Yashwant Pur, Banglore to Hazrat Nizammudin Station, New Delhi.  The appellants/complainants also sent a claim to the Railway Board for the loss suffered due to the negligence of the railway but they did not get any response from them.  Hence a complaint was filed before the Ld. District Forum claiming Rs8 lacs.  Rs. 5 lacs towards the loss suffered by them and Rs.3 lacs towards harassment and torture.

3.                On notice, respondent/OP appeared and filed written statement wherein it had taken plea that no notice had been served to respondent/OP.  It was further alleged by the respondent/OP that conduct of the appellant-1/complainant-1 while going to the toilet was to be noted as she did not hand over the bag containing valuables to her husband i.e. appellant-2/OP-2 who was also travelling with her.  Further the respondent/OP had also questioned regarding valuables contained in the bag because no receipt of the jewellery was provided to the respondent/OP.

4.                Appellants/complainants had filed rejoinder reiterating the facts as were stated in the complaint.               

5.                Both the parties filed their evidence.  After going through the evidence filed by both the parties, the Ld. District Forum has passed the following order:

“Brief perusal of the documents attached shows that the FIR has been lodged in Jhansi police station with the help of railway staff and the second FIR was also lodged in Delhi.  However, the bag was recovered with the missing valuables, clearly establishing the factum of theft.  This is a common security problem faced by numerous passengers.  Once the ticket fare is paid to the Railways for reservation, Railways are accountable for the safe and complete journey of the passengers and their luggage.

 

Such incidents in running train amounts to negligence in services provided by the Railways.  The complainant has put a highly inflated claim for loss of credit cards key and other documents etc. and we, therefore, award a compensation of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant for harassment and mental agony caused to them inclusive of litigation expenses.”

 

6.                Not satisfied with the award passed, appellant/complainants have filed the present appeal for enhancement of the compensation.     

7.                The contention of the appellants/complainants is that the claim of the damages awarded in favour of them is very nominal as compared to value of articles stolen such as jewellery, credit card as well as other identity card and besides that appellants/complainants had to travel Gonda and Jhansi twice to cancel their credit cards alleged to have been stolen and apply for fresh driving licence etc.  It is contended that harassment/inconvenience faced by appellants/complainants due to the theft of their bag is far more than the sum awarded to them.

8.                Further contention of the appellants/complainants is that as the couple was going to attend marriage, they were carrying a large number of jewellery and cash of Rs.15,000/- in the bag for which they have also provided list to the police while lodging the FIR.  The list is annexed with the appeal filed i.e. Ex-CW-1/6 with the original complaint filed before the Ld. District Forum.  According to the appellants/complainants, there were 18 items in their bag, but when the bag was recovered, there was no jewellery or cash in the bag and some cards were also missing from the bag.  At the time of hearing, it was stated by the appellants/complainants that they have lost diamond rings and jewellery worth more than Rs.5 lacs and the award passed by the Ld. District Forum is not sufficient enough.              

9.                On the other hand, contention of the respondent/OP is that the railway administration is not responsible for the loss, destruction or damages as the appellants/complainants had not booked the luggage and did not provide any receipt about the alleged lost.  Therefore, the award passed by the Ld. District Forum is sufficient.  It is pertinent to mention here that the respondent/OP i.e. Indian Railways has not challenged the order of the Ld. District Forum.

10.              We have carefully gone through the records and the list provided by the appellant/complainant about the lost articles.  It is not disputed between the parties about the loss of the bag of the appellant No.1/complainant No.1 and it is also not disputed that first FIR was lodged in Jhansi Police Station with the help of railway staff and the second FIR was lodged in Delhi.  It is also not disputed that the bag was recovered without the missing valuables which clearly establish the factum of theft.  The only dispute is about the quantum of the award to the appellant/complainant.  The complainants in their complaint as well as in appeal have stated that they were carrying some jewellery in their bag.  Looking into the age of the appellants/complainants as they are senior citizens and they have gone Gonda twice in search of their bag, the amount awarded to them is not sufficient. If the worth of lost articles was only Rs.15,000/-, they would not have taken so much of trouble running to Gonda and Jhansi.  Even we cannot rule out completely the averments of the appellants/complainants that they were carrying some jewellery.   Looking into the harassment caused to the appellants/complainants, we enhance the awarded amount from Rs.15,000/-  to Rs.1,25,000/-.  As the complainants have not filed any proof/receipt about the lost items, we cannot award Rs.5 lacs in favour of the appellants/complainants.

11.              In the result, we allow the appeal of the appellants/complainants and enhance the awarded amount from Rs.15,000/- to the tune of Rs.1,25,000/- which will be paid by the respondent/OP to the appellants/complainants within 45 days of the order reaches to them.                  

12.              A copy of the order be sent to the parties as well as to Ld. District Forum for necessary information. Record of the District Forum be also sent back forth.  Thereafter, file be consigned to record room.

         

 

 (Justice Veena Birbal)

President

 

(Salma Noor)

Member