Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

FA/13/309

MANOJ S.RATHORE - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAILWAY - Opp.Party(s)

11 Aug 2015

ORDER

M. P. STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,                         

                             PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

 

                                      FIRST APPEAL NO. 309 OF 2013

(Arising out of order dated 02.02.2013 passed in C.C.No.239/2009 by District Forum, Ujjain)

 

MANOJ SINGH RATHORE,

S/O SHRI MOHAN SINGH RATHORE,

R/O 21, KAHARWADI, UJJAIN.                                                        … APPELLANT.

 

Versus

 

1. GENERAL MANAGER, INDIAN RAILWAY,

    CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI.

 

2. GENERAL MANAGER, INDIAN RAILWAY,

    BHOPAL.

 

3. STATION MASTER, WESTERN RAILWAY,

    SEHORE.

 

4. STATION INCHARGE,

    GRP POLICE STATION, SEHORE.                                             …RESPONDENTS.                               

                                 

BEFORE :

            HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH SAKSENA    :     PRESIDENT

            HON’BLE SMT.NEERJA SINGH                              :      MEMBER

            HON’BLE SHRI SUBHASH JAIN                             :       MEMBER   

          

COUNSEL FOR PARTIES :

                Shri Aftab Khan, learned counsel for the appellant.

          Shri H. S. Rajput, learned counsel for the respondent.

                                                 

                                                      O R D E R

                                       (Passed On  11.08. 2015)

                   The following order of the Commission was delivered by Shri Subhash Jain, Member:

           

                   This appeal is filed by the complainant being aggrieved by the order dated 02.02.2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ujjain in C.C.No.239/2009. whereby the complaint filed by him is dismissed.

2.                The brief facts of the case are that the complainant along with his wife travelled in Narmada Express on 18.05.2008 from Jabalpur to

-2-

Ujjain with reserved ticket on berth no. 40 and 48 in Coach No.S-6.  During journey they were carrying a suitcase which at Bhopal Railway Station, they were found missing of which a complaint was lodged at GRP Sehore. It is alleged that the suitcase contained some gold and silver ornaments and valuable clothes.  The complainant also served a legal notice on respondents but when no action was taken he therefore filed a complaint before the District Forum alleging deficiency in service on the part of respondents and claiming total compensation of Rs.3,50,000/-.

2.                The opposite party-respondents Railway resisted the complaint taking some objections that the District Forum Ujjain had no territorial jurisdiction as the incident occurred at Bhopal.  It was further stated that Railways owns the liability of only booked luggage and if the passenger is carrying valuable articles without declaring it to railways, it is his responsibility to carry such articles at his own risk.  The complainant filed a complaint against the Western Railway whereas it has to be filed against the Central Railway.

3.                The District Forum after going through the documents and evidentiary material produced on record has found that so far as the amount claimed towards his articles i.e. gold and silver ornaments can only be ascertained on the basis of detailed evidence.  The complainant has stated that ornaments and other articles of his wife were stolen but the complainant failed to file her affidavit and in absence of affidavit it cannot be ascertained that which ornaments were kept by her during travelling.  The bills produced by the complainant are of estimate type (kacche bills) which can only be

 

-3-

examined in detailed evidence, the value of gold also cannot be ascertained.  The complainant neither lodged a complaint at Bhopal nor did he inform the

Guard and TTE of the train.  He has also not given the explanation that why he not informed the Guard and TTE of the train.  The complainant has also not filed the affidavits of the persons who gave the bills. The District Forum therefore dismissed the complaint with liberty to claim relief in appropriate Court.  The complainant is therefore before us in appeal.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for parties and gone through the record.

5.                From the record, we find that the appellant along with his wife travelled in Narmada Express on 18.05.2008 from Jabalpur to Ujjain in sleeper coach S-6 and during his journey he lost his suitcase at Bhopal Station of which report was lodged at GRP Sehore.  The complainant-appellant has stated in his complaint before the District Forum that at Bhopal Station he did not find his suitcase filled with ornaments at the place where he kept the same.  He has nowhere stated in his complaint nor pleaded before us that he tied his suitcase with chain and locked it as a safety measure.  The appellant has also not pleaded that there was no TTE or the Railway Staff or GRP to check and see that no authorized persons enter the compartment or some unauthorized persons were travelling in the train and the Railway Staff or the TTE had taken no action.  Though it is true that the Railway is responsible to care and protect the passengers in the reserved compartment but in the absence of any such plea or ground that the Railway Staff was not vigilant and had not taken care, Railways cannot be held to be guilty of deficiency in service.  It is also the duty of the passengers to keep

-4-

their belongings in safe possession and without any specific plea that Railway Staff act negligently and carelessly and allowed the unauthorized persons to travel in the reserved compartment, responsibility cannot be laid down on the Railway for safety of the personal belongings of the passengers.

6.                In view of the above we find that the complainant-appellant failed to prove his case and the District Forum has rightly dismissed his complaint.  We do not find to take a different view of the matter.  The appeal is devoid of merit and is dismissed.  No order as to cost. 

 

  (JUSTICE RAKESH SAKSENA)     (SMT.NEERJA SINGH)         (SUBHASH JAIN)

                 PRESIDENT                                   MEMBER                             MEMBER                                                       

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dubey