DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No. 561/2012
Dip Lal Sharma Senior Citizen
Sector IV/309, R.K. Puram, (90 Yrs. Old)
New Delhi.
Present Address:
H.No. 17, Akshardham Apartments,
Pocket-III, Sector-19,
Dwarka, New Delhi -Complainant
Vs
General Manager
Northern Railways
Baroda House
New Delhi. -Opposite Party
Date of Institution: 23.10.2012 Date of Order : 18.03.2016
Coram:
N.K. Goel, President
Naina Bakshi, Member
S.S. Fonia, Member
O R D E R
S.S. Fonia, Member
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the complainant aged 87 years of age had booked accommodation for himself and his wife by Swaran Shatabadi Express from Jalandhar City to New Delhi departing Jalandhar City on 25.12.2011. Copy of reservation ticket is Annex. A-2. On reaching Jalandhar City Railway Station at 4.00 p.m., complainant is said to have enquired about the train time & platform number where it would reach. On getting information, the complainant and his wife reached at Platform No. 2 where the train was scheduled to arrive. However, he found that before the arrival of Swaran Shatabadi Express Platform No. 2 was occupied by Chhatisgarh Express. He waited under the hope that it will vacate the platform before arrival of Swaran Shatabadi Express. The complainant further states that “Suddenly, he realized that the Swaran Shatabadi Express had already arrived at Platform No. 3 and people started shifting to Platform No. 3 causing stampede like condition. The complainant and his wife started moving fast to their allotted bogie No. C/12. His wife was virtually lifted by her nephew and his wife followed by their son carrying their luggage. The complainant with the help of other child tried his best to catch up with them but mid way to the target the train started moving. He tried to enter the nearest bogie which turned out to be C-10 and he caught hold of the two bars of the door and put his foot on the footboard when suddenly somebody from inside in his haste of jumping out forcibly pushed his right hand leaving him hanging in the air with his left hand holding the bar hanging precariously.” The complainant further states that he somehow managed to enter the bogie escaping narrowly from the mortal fall as some good Samaritan running along the train kept him pushing from behind while another person pulled him inside. Complainant states that the whole episode and the narrow escape had shaken his entire nervous system to the hilt so much so that in the extreme cold weather of December month he was perspiring. He states to be a heart patient with heart by-pass surgery. Blaming gross deficiency in service due to negligence by the OP, he brought this happening to the notice of Railway Authorities vide his representation dated 31.12.2011 asking them inter-alia to pay compensation of Rs. 1 Lakh and made other suggestions as per Annx. A-3. It is stated as under:-
“The Railway HQ Baroda House, New Delhi have investigated the matter and conveyed me vide their letter No.11CT/FZR-4/12 dated 10-05-2012, that due to operational reasons, train No.12030 was placed at PF No.3 instead of PF No.2. As such no any deficiency has been seen on the part of the staff. This is for your kind information & inconveniences caused to you is deeply regretted please. A copy of Railway Letter is enclosed herewith as Annexure A-14.”
Invoking jurisdiction of this forum he has prayed for the following:
- The Northern Railways should be directed to pay him Rs. One Lakh compensation for deficiency in service as incident had caused heavy damage to his mental health which took days together to recover from the fearful anxiety.
- To take remedial measures to avoid recurrence of such incident.
- To enhance the stoppage time of the train in case of eleventh hour change of platform.
- To ensure presence of some Railway officials at platform to guide/help the aged and infirm.
Contesting the claim of the complainant, OP has filed written statement inter-alia seeking dismissal of the complaint on the ground that “that it is clearly mentioned in the Railway Time Table on page No. C/9 & C/59 that Railway Administration will endeavor to provide reserved accommodation but does not guarantee for the same and will admit to (sic) claim for compensation for inconvenience”. OP has further replied that “Swaran Shatabadi Express was lying on PF No. 3 instead of PF No. 2 but both the platforms are in parallel situation (the another side of same platform) and does not effect to the sequence of the trains”. It is further stated that in advance it was intimated to all the passengers through Public Address System. OP has further submitted that Swaran Shatabadi Express is a vestibule train, passengers can board in the train from any of the coach. It is stated as under:-
“Position of the train was consistently updated and was announced through Public Address System. Information to the passengers was given in advance through Public Address System. As such no type of deficiency has been caused on the part of the Railway.”
It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
Complainant has filed rejoinder reiterating the averments made in the complaint.
Complainant has further highlighted his old age as 88 years and 86 years of his wife with ailments.
Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence. On the other hand, affidavit of Sh. Upjeet Singh, Senior Dy. Chief Commercial Manager, DRM office, Northern Railway, Firozpur (Punjab) has been filed on behalf of OP.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties and Complainant has also filed additional written arguments. We have heard the counsel for parties and have also gone through the material on record.
Now, we straightway come to draw our conclusion with regard to admissibility of complaint and also the relief prayed for by the complainant.
Admittedly, the complainant along with his wife reached the Railway station at 4 p.m. and as per Annex. 2, scheduled departure time of the train was at 18.01 hrs. Thus, he had sufficient time at his disposal to board the train without over exertion and creation of stampede situation seems to be unrealistic. Swaran Shatabadi Express was lying at PF No. 3 instead of PF No. 2 but both the platforms are in parallel situation. Therefore, over bridge climbing is ruled out. This further goes to dilute the blame on railways for inefficiency on their part. Moreover, the train Swaran Shatabadi Express being vestibule type could have been boarded easily from any bogie without getting panicky. This precarious situation appears to have been triggered by desperation, commotion and anxiety leading to so-called dangling precariously of the complainant. The complainant could have avoided this catastrophe by handling the situation calmly without getting into commotion. Moreover, Jalandhar Railway Station was the starting place for Swaran Shatabdi Express. It is a matter of common knowledge that the train is brought atleast 30/45 minutes before the scheduled departure time at the starting point railway station. Therefore, with the exercise of due diligence, the Complainant could have easily found that Swaran Shatabdi Express was infact standing at platform No.3.
In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merit in the complaint and dismiss it with no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
(NAINA BAKSHI) (S.S. FONIA) (N.K. GOEL)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Announced on 18.03.16.
Case No. 561/12
18.03.2016
Present – None.
Vide our separate order of even date pronounced, the complaint is dismissed. Let the file be consigned to record room.
(
(NAINA BAKSHI) (S.S. FONIA) (N.K. GOEL)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
