DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PALAKKAD
Dated this the 28th day of May 2009.
Present : Smt. H. Seena, President : Smt. Preetha.G. Nair (Member) : Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K. (Member) C.C.No.124/2007
Mohanan S/o. Achuthan Nair Aishwarya P.O. Kailiyad Shornur Palakkad - 679 122 - Complainant (Adv .T.G. Suresh) V/s
1. The Chairman Railway Board New Delhi. (Adv. T.R. Rajagopalan) 2. The General Manager Southern Railway Chennai Central Chennai (Adv. T.R.Rajagopalan) 3. The Station Master Southern Railway Shornur Railway Station Palakkad. - Opposite Parties (Adv. T.R.Rajagopalan)
O R D E R By Smt. H. Seena, President
In short the case of the complainant is as follows.
Complaint is filed claiming compensation towards the physical and mental agony suffered by the complainant and his family members during the journey from New Delhi to Shornur. The journey started on 12/09/2007 in S 5 compartment, berth No.65,66,67 and 68 in Train No.2618. Complainant and his family members suffered a lot of in conveniences during the journey. There was no proper water supply to the toilet of the compartment during the journey. Due to the lack of water supply, it was untidy and stringent smell - 2 - coming from the toilet was unbearable. The berth was near the toilet and that increased the suffocation. When the complainant attempted to wash hands in the wash basin using mineral water, water drained out through the pipes. The pipes were not provided proper valve and the connections were not properly maintained. When other passengers also used the same method for cleaning hands, water drained out through the pipes and completely soacked the luggage of the complainant. Further the bolt of the bathroom could not be bolted from inside. It is the duty of the Railway authorities to maintain the train compartment and toilet in clean and in good conditions. Lack of proper service on the part of opposite parties is clear and apparent. Opposite party is bound to compensate the complainant. Complainant claims an amount of Rs.20,000/- each as compensation for their sufferings.
Opposite parties entered appearance. 3rd Opposite party filed version on behalf of all opposite parties. The Ist contention is that as the complaint does not disclose any cause of action against Ist opposite party and hence Ist opposite party is an unnecessary party to this proceedings. Further opposite party denies the entire allegations of the complainant. According to opposite parties the entire bogies of the train used to be cleaned and compartment checked by the maintenance staff before the train starts at the starting point itself. Even if there was any defect, the same used to be rectified as and when complaints are received from the intermediate stations. Further the starting station namely New Delhi is the Northern Railway Division. The train subsequently passess through Kankanadi station in the state of Karnataka. All these stations are outside the jurisdiction of the Southern Railway. Even if there was any deficiency in those stations, the General Manager of Southern Railway and the Station Master, Shornur cannot be made responsible. Complaint is filed with a view to extract compensation from Railway administration by making false allegations and is liable to be dismissed.
Complainant and opposite parties filed their respective affidavits. Exhibit A1 to A3 marked on the side of the complainant and Exhibit B1 and B2 marked on the side of Opposite parties.
In the context of these rival contentions the following issues are framed. - 3 - 1. Whether the opposite parties are guilty of deficiency of service on their part? 2. If so, what order? Issue No.1 It is not disputed that complainant along with his family members has travelled from New Delhi to Shornur in train No.2618. The grievance of the complainant is regarding the non-supply of water in the compartment and unhygienic condition in the compartment, toilet and wash basin. It is evident from Exhibit A2 that complainant has made a complaint before the Railway authorities stating the above grievances as soon as he reached Shornur. Eight photographs taken from mobile camera were also produced by the complainant which depicts the worse condition in the toilet and wash basin. The marking of the same was objected by the opposite party as it was not supported by negatives. Opposite parties has produced Exhibit B1 document which is the report given by Apcon India for mechanized cleaning, washing and watering of coaches for Railways. In the said document it is stated that water filling and toilet cleaning was done on 12/09/2007. From Exhibit B1 it is not clear whether the Railway has given such contract to Apcon India. Opposite party has not examined the signatory of the said document in order to prove its genuinity and that too in the context wherein the complainant specifically alleges non supply of water and unhygienic conditions in the toilet and washbasin. Since the Honourable National Commission has repeatedly stated in several decisions that consumer forums are not bound by the strict rules of evidence, we have carefully gone through the photographs produced by the complainant also. The said photograph are clear evidences of the worse conditions in the compartment and supports the case of the complainant.
We find clear shortcomings in the nature and manner of performance of duties on the part of Opposite parties which ought not to have occurred. We are therefore constrained to answer the issue in favour of the complainant.
In the view that we have taken under Issue No.1, what remain to be seen is what is the compensation the complainant is entitled to. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we believe that the ends of justice will be served if we award a - 4 - compensation of Rs.10,000/-. Ist and 2nd opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant. 3rd Opposite party being the Station Master of the place where the journey ended has nothing to do with the grievance of the complainant. It is seen that 3rd Opposite party has duly forwarded the complaint registered to the higher authorities and hence 3rd opposite party is exonerated from liability.
In the result, complaint allowed. Ist and 2nd Opposite party jointly directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for the sufferings and Rs.1000/- as cost of the proceedings. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order failing which the whole amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till realization. Pronounced in the open court on the 28th day of May 2009 PRESIDENT (SD) MEMBER (SD) MEMBER (SD) APPENDIX Witness examined on the side of Complainant Nil Witness examined on the side of Opposite party Nil Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant Ext. A1 – Reservation Ticket dated 12.09.2007 Ext. A2 - Copy of complaint given to Southern Railway Shornur Ext A3 - Letter from Divisional Railway Manger to complainant
Exhibits marked on the side of the Opposite Party Ext. B1 - Copy of report given by Apcon India for mechanized cleaning, washing and watering coaches of Train No.2618. Ext B2 series- Letter from Central Railway dated 21.12.07
Forums Exhibits Nil Cost (allowed) Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) allowed as cost of proceedings) Forwarded/By Order
Senior Superintendent
......................Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K
......................Smt.Preetha.G.Nair
......................Smt.Seena.H | | 
