NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/711/2019

UNION OF INDIA & 3 ORS. - Complainant(s)

Versus

RAJENDRA SETHIYA - Opp.Party(s)

MR. SANJEEV KUMAR VERMA

27 Aug 2024

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 711 OF 2019
(Against the Order dated 04/01/2019 in Appeal No. 2363/2014 of the State Commission Madhya Pradesh)
1. UNION OF INDIA & 3 ORS.
THROUGH G.M. WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY,
JABALPUR
MADHYA PRADESH
2. DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER,
COMMERCIAL WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY,
JABALPUR
MADHYA PRADESH
3. DIVISIONAL RAIL MANAGER,
COMMERCIAL WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY
BHOPAL
MADHYA PRADESH
4. STATION SUPERINTENDENT
RAILWAY STATION
KATANI
MADHYA PRADESH
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. RAJENDRA SETHIYA
S/O. SH. B.D. SETHIYA, R/O. AJAD CHOWK, IN FRONT OF AZAD TENT HOUSE, KATANI, TEHSIL KATNI,
DISTRICT-KATNI
MADHYA PRADESH
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA,PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. ROHIT KUMAR SINGH,MEMBER

FOR THE PETITIONER :
MR. SANJEEV KUMAR VERMA, ADVOCATE
FOR THE RESPONDENT :NEMO

Dated : 27 August 2024
ORDER

 

          None appears on behalf of the Respondent, who has been absent from the Proceedings for almost 1 ½ years, although he had been validly served for 20/03/2023, but never appeared before this Commission.

2.       Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner has drawn attention to copy of the FIR No. 60 of 2013 lodged by the Complainant/Respondent himself, in which it was nowhere his allegation that either any authorized persons had entered the reserved compartment in which he was travelling, or that doors of the compartment were not bolted during the specified time.

3.       In “Zonal Manager/General Manager Bilaspur (C.C) & Anr. Vs. Puruushottam Mohta”, I (2019) CPJ 335 (NC), decided on 24.01.2019, in similar circumstances, this Commission had allowed the Revision Petition and set aside the Orders passed by the Fora below which had all gone in favour of the Complainant/Respondent, when it was seen that  no instances of negligence such as by way of permitting any unauthorized persons in the reserved Raiway Compartment had been disclosed in the FIR lodged by the Complainant concerned.

4.       Ld. counsel has also relied upon the recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.7116/2017 in “Station Superintendent & Anr. Vs. Surender Bhola”, in which similarly, the Orders of the District Forum, State Commission and also this Commission were set aside with the observation:-

“ We fail to understand as to how the theft could be said to be in any way a deficiency in service by the Railways.  If the Passenger is not able to protect his own belongings, the Railways cannot be held responsible.

5.       The ratio of the decision in the case of “Zonal Manager/General Manager Bilaspur (C.C) & Anr. Vs. Puruushottam Mohta”(Supra) is fully applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case in which the FIR lodged by the Complainant/Respondent did not indicate any act of negligence on the part of the Railway Authorities.

6.       For the aforesaid reasons, we allow this Revision Petition after setting aside the Orders of both the Ld. Fora below.

7.       The Complaint filed by the Complainant accordingly stand dismissed.

8.       Parties to bear their own costs.

 
......................................J
SUDIP AHLUWALIA
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
 
...........................................
ROHIT KUMAR SINGH
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.