Delhi

New Delhi

CC/19/2009

Kali Charan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Union of India (Ministry of Railway Northern Railway) - Opp.Party(s)

12 Jun 2019

ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI),

                 ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

                                                           NEW DELHI-110001

 

Case No.C.C./19/2009                                                   Dated:

   In the matter of:

                Shri. Kali Charan

    S/o Late Shri Ram Jit

    R/o House No. 101,

    Vill & P.O. Kataiteekar,

     Distt. Gorakhpur (UP) 

    …… Complainant

        Versus

1. The Ministry of Railway

Rail Bhawan, New Delhi

           

2. Union of India, through

Ministry of Railways

(Northern Railway) Baroda House,

New Delhi, through its General Manager

           

3. The Station Master

Nangloi Railway Station, Delhi

 

                                                                              …….Opposite Parties

 

 

 

 

H.M. VYAS – MEMBER

                                                                        ORDER

The complaint has alleged that the son of the complainant Sh. Chandan of 2-1/2 years of age alongwith his mother and other family members were waiting from Gorakhdham Express, Train no. 2556 on platform of Nangloi Railway Station of Northern Railway/OP to board the train going to Gorakhpur U.P. All of a sudden Shatabdi Express came from the side of Bahadurgarh, Haryana. Due to heavy rush on platform of Nangloi Station, Sh. Ravinder, Chandan and Reena fell down and unfortunately hit by the Shatabdi (train).  Sh.  Chandan received  fatal injuries in the rail accident caused by the fast running  train Shatabdi only due to mismanagement, lack of proper  announcement of arrival and departure of trains and cautioning the passengers from possible accident  while passing of the train from particular platform.  Son of the complainant Sh. Chandan was taken to LNJP Hospital, New Delhi. However, he succumbed to the injuries suffered The post mortem was conducted at Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital, S-Block, Mangol puri, Delhi.

It is also stated that the complainant preferred  a claim petition under Section 16 of the Railway accident Claims Tribunal Act before the Railway Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench New Delhi vide as alleged no. 187/2007 titled as Kali charan v/s Union of India.

The Tribunal vide orders dated 17.10.2008 dismissed the petition by holding that “ the accident in question being not an accident  within the meaning of Section 124 of an untoward incident within the meaning of Section  123(c) read with section 124 A of the Railway Act, the claim application filed by the applicant before  the Tribunal Under Section 16 of the Railway  Claims Tribunal Act, is not maintainable as the jurisdiction of this Tribunal Under Section 13 of the Railway Claims Tribunal  Act , is limited.

Alleging negligence and deficiency in service on the part of OP, following Prayer has been made :-

It is, therefore, prayed that the Hon’ble District Forum, may be pleased to grant compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/-(Rs. 6 lacs only) to the complainants on account of compensation with cost and interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of accident till realization  for pains, sufferings, mental shock, agonies, hardships, humiliations, harassment loss of perspective and prospective income, only bread earner, shoulder of old age, loss of human life/ son of complainants etc, which is  just, legitimate and appropriate and in the interest of justice.

Any other order(s)/ relief(s) which the Hon’ble District Forum may deem fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances  of the case, be also passed  in favour of complainants and against the opposite party with  costs of litigation on and interest@18% per annum, on amount of compensation, in the interest of justice, in the fitness of things.

The OP after notice filed written statement stating that the Forum does not have the territorial jurisdiction in view of the provisions of the Section 13,15 and 28 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.  It is stated that the alleged accident was caused due to negligence on the part of the Complainant Sh. Ravinder and Smt. Reena as they were crossing the Railway Track. The OP has denied any negligence or deficiency in service on this part. Prayer to dismiss the complaint has been made.

Both the parties filed their respective evidence by way of affidavit. Both the parties have filed their written arguments. Oral arguments were also addressed.

We have considered the material placed before us and the submissions made by the parties.  The complainants have themselves filed the copy of orders dated 17.10.2008 passed by the Railway Tribunal wherein it was hold that the accident being not an accident within the meaning of Section 124 of an untoward accident within the meaning of Section 123(C) read with Section 124 (A) of the act, the claimed application filed by the application before the Tribunal Under Section16 is not maintainable  as the jurisdiction of Tribunal  Under Section 13 is limited. The remedy for application is to claim compensation under the common law of torts in Civil Court.

So far as the allegations of negligence and deficiency in service alleged by the complainant causing alleged accident is concerned, we are of the view that the Railway Tribunal has held the incident to be not covered within the meaning of untoward accident.  The proceedings before this Forum are summary proceedings under the C.P. Act and from the circumstances and facts of the case, it is clear that the present case is not a simple case of deficiency in service and involves determination of complex questions of facts and law which cannot be satisfactorily determined by this Forum in summary proceedings under the C.P. Act. We are, therefore, of the considered view that it would be better for the complainant to seek redress of grievances in a Civil Court and hold accordingly. The complaint is disposed off in above terms, however, liberty is granted to the complaint to approach Civil Court, if so advised.

Copy of the order may be forwarded to the parties to the case free of cost as statutorily required. 

Announced in open Forum on  12/06/2019

The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in

File be consigned to record room.

 

 

                                                    (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                                                             PRESIDENT

 

   (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                            (HM VYAS)

        MEMBER                                                                                       MEMBER