DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016

Case No.32/2021

Mr. Om Pal Singh

Sh. Bijender Singh Tomar

45 B Brijwasi Colony, Sultan Pur Near Bhati General Store,

Mehrauli, New Delhi-110030                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ….Complainant

Versus

The Divisional Commercial Manager

North Central Railways, Agra-282003

The Assistant Commercial Manager,

North Central Railways,

Head Quarter, Allahabad-211003

The General Manager

Northern Railway Headquarter

Baroda House New Delhi - 110001                                                           ….Opposite Party

       Date of Institution     :        25.01.2021

       Date of Order             :        07.12.2021

Coram:

Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

Sh. U.K. Tyagi, Member

Order

President: Ms. Monika A Srivastava

Present Consumer Complaint has been filed by the Complainant under  the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the Northern Railways through the Divisional Commercial Manager,  Assistant Commercial Manager and General Manager (hereinafter referred to as "Opposite Parties") seeking the following reliefs: i.e. Rs.5,00,000/- towards deficiency in services, Rs.15,00,000/- for mental agony and Rs. 50,000/- towards the cost of legal expenses.

Brief facts of the case which are necessary for deciding of the present complaint are that the Complainant had undertaken a journey from Hazrat Nizamuddin to Agra Cantt on 16.10.2017 by Taj express 12280 vide PNR No. 28184 25998. The said ticket was shown as waitlisted at Sr. No. 47. It is the case of the complainant that he boarded the train and had a confirmed seat number 73 in coach number 14 and yet after getting down from the train he was ill treated by the railway TT staff and was pushed in a lock up along with other passengers who did not have tickets.

            It is further the case of the complainant that he was treated like a criminal and was taken to railway magistrate where the magistrate told him ‘to either pay the penalty or opt for jail’. He has filed the present complaint as he was manhandled, abused and wrongly penalised inspite of having a confirmed ticket.

The Complainant has stated that the whole incident was reported by him in a letter to the minister of railway and to other functionaries of the railways but no action was taken by the Opposite Party. The Complainant therefore has filed the present Complaint before this Commission.

We have perused the material on record. It is first to be seen whether the Complaint was filed within the requisite time period i.e., within two years of accrual of cause of action i.e from 2017.

The limitation period as prescribed by Section 69 under the 2019 Act for admission of a complaint by the consumer forum:

 Limitation period - (1) The District Commission, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1), a complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District Commission, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period:

Provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the National Commission, the State Commission or the District Commission, as the case may be, records its reasons for condoning such delay.

From the aforesaid provision, it is imperative that this Commission should examine, before the admission of the Complaint, that it has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action

As has been held by the Hon’ble State Commission in Gian Gupta vs DDA CC No. 155/2010 decided on 16.08.2021 “The expression, `shall not admit a complaint' occurring in Section 24A is sort of a legislative command to the Consumer Forum to examine on its own whether the Complaint has been filed within limitation period prescribed thereunder. As a matter of law, the Consumer Forum must deal with the complaint on merits only if it has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action and if beyond the said period, the sufficient cause has been shown and delay condoned for the reasons recorded in writing. In other words, it is the duty of the Consumer Forum to take notice of Section 24A and give effect to it. If the complaint is barred by time and yet, the Consumer Forum decides the complaint on merits, the forum would be committing an illegality.”

 According to the Complainant, the cause of action, in the present case has arisen on  16.10.2017 when the complainant had undertaken the journey from Hazrat Nizamuddin to Agra Cantt by Taj express 12280 vide PNR No. 28184 25998. The Complainant has however filed the complaint on 25.01.2021 i.e after three and half years after the said incident.

The Complainant has also not moved an application for condonation of delay explaining the delay in filing the present Complaint.

Therefore the present complaint is dismissed as being time barred as incident complained of is that of 16.10. 2017 and the present complaint has been filed in the year 2021.

File be consigned to the record room after giving copy of the complaint.