Order No. 23 dt. 18/10/2017
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant purchased sleeper class reserved ticket for travelling from Bhuvaneswar to Howrah in Down Puri-Howrah Super Fast Express train on 18/05/2013. The complainant and his family members were travelling in coach no. 5. The complainant noticed that some unauthorized persons were travelling in the said coach. The complainant brought to the notice of the T.T.E. He also requested the complainant to provide with the complaint book but the T. T. E. ignored the request of the complainant. The train was a super fast train but it stopped at a non-schedule station at Datan and at about 2.50 hrs. While the train started to move one unknown person snatched the black coloured bag through the window. The said black colour bag contained valuable articles including gold chain, cash, mobile phone etc. The complainant pulled the chain but the train did not stop. After the incident while the complainant raised hue and cry no police personnel reached there. The complainant after reaching at Howrah lodged an FIR on 19/05/2013. It was further stated by the complainant that the complainant and his family members suffered due to negligence and poor by the Railway. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for compensation of Rs. 80,000/- and litigation cost.
O.p.s 1 and 2 contested the case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that the complainant did not book the aforesaid black coloured bag containing the said goods and articles therein with the Railway. Railway had no knowledge regarding the articles carried by the complainant. It is duty of the passengers to keep his bag in his self custody and take care thereof. The complainant has stated that some unknown persons entered the compartment but in the petition of complaint it was stated that the bag was snatched while the train stopped at an unscheduled station. It was further stated that through the window, i.e. from the outside of the coach and while the bag was kept under the head of the wife of the complainant the bag was taken away. Such contradictory statement nullifies the contention of the complainant. The complainant could not proof the alleged incident of theft with cogent evidence. The Railway administration had not provided any undertaking to the complainant to carry safely the handbag of the complainant’s wife by accepting extra charges such as insurance charges etc. So there is no Railway’s responsibility for safe carriage of hand bag which was in the custody of the wife of the complainant during their journey. Since the complainant had not hired or availed of any services for a consideration on payment or promise by the Railway administration with regard to safe carriage of the handbag of his wife containing valuable articles. So the complainant is not at all beneficiary of such service and his claim as consumer for such a deficiency in service is not at all maintainable. On the basis of the said fact the o.p.s prayed for dismissal of the case.
On the basis of the pleadings of parties the following points are to be decided :-
- Whether the complainant had travelled in the train on the fateful day ?
- Whether there was theft in respect of the valuable articles during the time of the travel ?
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the o.p., Railway ?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?
Decision with reasons :-
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant purchased sleeper class reserved ticket for travelling from Bhuvaneswar to Howrah in Down Puri-Howrah Super Fast Express train on 18/05/2013. The complainant and his family members were travelling in coach no. 5. The complainant noticed that some unauthorized persons were travelling in the said coach. The complainant brought to the notice of the T.T.E. He also requested the complainant to provide with the complaint book but the T. T. E. ignored the request of the complainant. The train was a super fast train but it stopped at a non-schedule station at Datan and at about 2.50 hrs. While the train started to move one unknown person snatched the black coloured bag through the window. The said black colour bag contained valuable articles including gold chain, cash, mobile phone etc. The complainant pulled the chain but the train did not stop. After the incident while the complainant raised hue and cry no police personnel reached there. The complainant after reaching at Howrah lodged an FIR on 19/05/2013. It was further stated by the complainant that the complainant and his family members suffered due to negligence and poor by the Railway. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case praying for compensation of Rs. 80,000/- and litigation cost.
Ld. Lawyer for the o.p.s argued that the complainant did not book the aforesaid black coloured bag containing the said goods and articles therein with the Railway. Railway had no knowledge regarding the articles carried by the complainant. It is duty of the passengers to keep his bag in his self custody and take care thereof. The complainant has stated that some unknown persons entered the compartment but in the petition of complaint it was stated that the bag was snatched while the train stopped at an unscheduled station. It was further stated that through the window, i.e. from the outside of the coach and while the bag was kept under the head of the wife of the complainant the bag was taken away. Such contradictory statement nullifies the contention of the complainant. The complainant could not proof the alleged incident of theft with cogent evidence. The Railway administration had not provided any undertaking to the complainant to carry safely the handbag of the complainant’s wife by accepting extra charges such as insurance charges etc. So there is no Railway’s responsibility for safe carriage of hand bag which was in the custody of the wife of the complainant during their journey. Since the complainant had not hired or availed of any services for a consideration on payment or promise by the Railway administration with regard to safe carriage of the handbag of his wife containing valuable articles. So the complainant is not at all beneficiary of such service and his claim as consumer for such a deficiency in service is not at all maintainable. On the basis of the said fact the o.p.s prayed for dismissal of the case.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that while the complainant was travelling from Bhuvaneswar to Howrah in Down Puri-Howrah Super Fast Express train on 18/05/2013 a theft was committed in respect of a bag belonging to his wife. It is also an admitted fact immediately after the said incident the complainant intimated the said fact to the T.T.E. and after reaching Howrah, West Bengal the complainant lodged an FIR. In order to prove the fact that the complainant was travelling in the said train filed some documents, therefore we have no hesitation to say that during the journey of the complainant a theft was committed in respect of a bag belonging to the complainant’s wife. So far as the Sec 100 of Indian Railways Act is concerned it appears that o.ps. had no liability in respect of the articles which were not booked by the passengers. Here in this case, the complainant could not provide any document to show that he booked those articles during time of the journey. It appears from the materials on record that the bag was not booked by the complainant, therefore as per Sec 100 of Indian Railways Act as well as Railways (Extent of Monetary Liability and Prescription of Percentage Charge) Rules 1990 railway has no liability to pay the damage to the passengers who did not book the articles for carrying those articles with them at the time of journey. It is not possible for the railway to provide security to all the passengers travelling during the journey and also to protect the passengers for keeping the safety of the articles carried by them during the time of their journey. On the basis of the judgment passed by Hon’ble National Commission in respect of R.P. No.1916 of 2014 we hold that the case filed by the complainant has got no merit and the complainant will not be entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, it is ordered,
that the case no. 632 of 2013 is dismissed on contest against the o.p.s without cost.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
