DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 154 of 14
DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 03.06.2014
DATE OF ORDER: -23.06.2017
Dindayal Soni Haluwas Gate, Circular Road, Bhiwani.
……………Complainant.
VERSUS
- Station Superintendent, Railway Station, Bhiwani.
- General Manager, Baroda House, New Delhi.
………….. Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT
BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member
Present:- Complainant in person.
Shri Mahipal Tanwar, Advocate for OPs.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
Brief facts of the present complaint are that on 30.4.2014 the complainant was coming from Surat to Rohtak in coach No. S5 of Train No. 19023. It is alleged that while he was cleaning his artificial teeth in the Wash Basen in the latrine of the coach no. S5, due to non-fixing of Jali in the Wash Basen the teeth of the complainant washed away. The complainant had to get procure new artificial teeth after spending Rs. 8,000/- at Bhiwani. It is further alleged that there was no attendant in the coach and therefore, the compartment was overcrowded and he could not sleep in the night. The complainant has given the written complaint at Hindon City Station to the guard of the train but to no avail. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and as such, he has to file the present complaint for seeking compensation.
2. On appearance, OPs filed written statement alleging therein that the provision of security guard is made keeping in view the requirement and situation for the whole train and not for each and every coach. It is submitted that the security guard reaches in the entire train as and when the necessity arises and they render help to the passengers and there is no provision for deploying any attendant in the sleepers. It is submitted that as per the version of the T.T.E. no unauthorized person was travelling in the coach in question. It is further submitted that jaw of artificial teeth cannot entre in the pipe of the Wash Basen which is generally of 1 ½ inch diameter. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.
3. Learned counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence Mark A. Written arguments on behalf of both the parties filed.
4. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the complainant and learned counsel for the opposite parties.
5. The complainant in person reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that on 30.4.2014 he was coming from Surat to Rohtak in coach No. S5 of Train No. 19023. He submitted that while he was cleaning his artificial teeth in the Wash Basen in the latrine of the coach no. S5, due to non-fixing of Jali in the Wash Basen the teeth of the complainant washed away. The complainant had to get procure new artificial teeth after spending Rs. 8,000/- at Bhiwani. He further submitted that there was no attendant in the coach and therefore, the compartment was overcrowded and he could not sleep in the night. The complainant has given the written complaint at Hindon City Station to the guard of the train.
6. Learned counsel for OPs reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that this District Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to try and decide the complaint, because the complainant started his journey from Surat to Rohtak and the complainant journey was terminated at Rohtak. He further submitted that the Jaw of artificial teeth cannot enter in the pipe of Wash Basen which is generally of 1 ½ inch diameter. The complainant has concocted the false story just to extort money from the complainant.
7. In the context of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the relevant material on record, carefully. The journey of complainant from Surat to Rohtak in sleeper coach is not disputed by the OPs. We found force in the contention of the complainant that there must have been some hardship to the complainant during the journey due to improper maintenance of toilet, Wash Basen etc. Considering the fact of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant against the OPs. The Ops are directed to pay Rs. 2,000/- as lumpsum compensation to the complainant. The amount of compensation be paid by the OPs to the complainant through demand draft drawn in his favour and the same be sent at his address given in the complaint within 30 days from the date of passing of this order. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 23.06.2017
(Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Parmod Kumar)
Member.
