By Smt. C. S. Sulekha Beevi, President,

1. The complainant booked four bundles of household articles through opposite parties for being carried from Madurai to Angadippuram. On 06-4-2009 only three bundles were delivered to him. Though he went to the railway station several times as per direction of opposite parties to receive the last bundle it was never delivered to him. The lost bundle contained household articles which were vessels and utensils made of brass, steel etc. That he has suffered much mental and physical strain and pain due to the non-delivery of the bundle. He alleges deficiency in service and hence this complaint.

2. Opposite party appearance through counsel and filed version. Opposite party admits that complainant had booked four bundles from Madurai to be carried to Angadippuram. It is also admitted that only three bundles were delivered and that one bundle was lost in transit. It is contended that the liability of opposite parties is limited to Rs.50/- per kg as per Railway Act.

3. Evidence consists of the proof affidavit filed by complainant and Exts.A1 to A6 marked for him. Opposite party filed proof affidavit of Ext.B1 marked for opposite party.

4. It is not disputed that complainant booked four bundles and that only three bundles were delivered to him. Opposite parties admit the loss of one bundle in transit. It is also admitted that the weight of the lost bundle is 42kg. Complainant has not declared the value of the articles. As per Sec.103 of the Railway Act, 1989, the liability is limited to the extent prescribed in railway (Extent of Monetary Liability and Prescription of Percentage of Charges) Rules, 1990. Rule 3 reads as under:

“3. Monetary liability of a Railway Administration.--(1) Where a Railway Administration is responsible for loss, damage, destruction, deterioration or non-delivery of any consignment, the amount of liability of such railway administration in respect of such loss, damage, destruction, deterioration or non-delivery shall not, unless the consignor has declared its value and paid percentage charge on excess value of such consignment, exceed,--

(i) in the case of any consignment consisting of animals, the amount specified in Schedule I; or

(ii) in the case of any consignment consisting of baggage, an amount calculated at rupees one hundred per kilogramme; or

(iii) in the case of any consignment other than those referred to in clause (i) and (ii) above, an amount calculated at rupees fifty per kilogramme.”

5. The complainant had send his household articles in the bundles. The consignment thus is a category of baggage and not goods. Therefore the liability prescribed under Rule 3 clause (ii) would be applicable which is Rs.100/- per kilogram. The opposite parties therefore would be liable to pay Rs.4,200/- (42kgs x Rs.100/-) for the loss of consignment. In our view the mental hardships undergone by the complainant also has to be considered. The complainant had to anxiously wait for the delivery of the bundle and also had to go to the Railway station several times to enquire about the missing parcel. He send registered notices for redressal of his grievance. It is definite that he had to undergo mental and physical hardships due to the loss of the bundle. We quantify an amount of Rs.6,000/- towards this together with cost of Rs.1,000/- which would be adequate relief to the complainant.

6. In the result, we allow the complaint and order opposite parties jointly and severally to pay Rs.4,200/-(Rupees four thousand two hundred only) in lieu of monetary liability under Railway Rules, and Rs.6,000/- (Rupees six thousand only) as compensation for mental and physical hardships together with Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) being cost of this proceedings. This order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Dated this 28th day of May, 2010.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A6

Ext.A1 : P.D.C. Dated, 06-4-2009received from opposite party to complainant.

Ext.A2 : Photo copy of the request dated, 15-4-2009 by complainant to second opposite party.

Ext.A3 : Photo copy of the request dated, 08-5-2009 by complainant to first opposite party

Ext.A4 : Postal acknowledgement card from first opposite party to complainant.

Ext.A5 : Photo copy of the request dated, 16-6-2009 by complainant to first opposite party

Ext.A6 : UCP receipt addressed to first opposite party from complainant.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1

Ext.B1 : Carbon copy of the parcel way bill dated, 31-3-2009.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER