Haryana

Kurukshetra

102/2018

Manoj Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

UBOI - Opp.Party(s)

12 Apr 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

                                                     Complaint Case No.102 of 2018.

                                                     Date of institution: 09.05.2018.

                                                     Date of decision: 12.04.2019.

 

Manoj Kumar son of Shri Chhajju Ram, resident of VPO Chandana, Tehsil & District Kaithal, now detained in District Jail Kaithal.

…Complainant.

                        Versus

1. Union of India, through its General Manager, Railway Department, Baroda House, New Delhi.
2. The Union of India through Secretary, Government of India Railway Department, New Delhi.
3. Railway Manager of Railway Department, Bhopal, Bhopal Express Train, Habibganj (Bhopal)-cum- Railway Manager, Nizamudin Railway Station, (Bhopal Express Train) New Delhi.
4. Incharge Police Station Railway, Police Station GRP Kurukshetra Junction, Kurukshetra Haryana.
5. Incharge Police Station Railway, Police Station GRP Station Mathura Junction, Mathura, District Agra- UP. 

….Opposite parties.

Before:      Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.

                Ms. Neelam, Member.

                Sh. Sunil Mohan Trikha, Member.

       

Present:     Sh. Amit Sharma, Adv. Legal aid counsel for complainant.   

                Opposite parties exparte.

               

ORDER

                This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Manoj Kumar against Union of India and others, the opposite parties.

2.            It is stated in the complaint that complainant is detained in District Jail Kaithal being convicted by the Court of Sh. Jasbir Singh, learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kaithal in case FIR No.38 dated 15.4.2012, under Section 302 IPC and 27 of the Arms Act on 10.2.2014 for life imprisonment. That the complainant is having agriculture land in village Mahosa, Tehsil Baabyi, District Horangabad (MP). The complainant was released on parole as per law and the complainant with a view to look after his agriculture land and to get rent went there. On 28.11.2015, after giving his land on lease with the cash amount of Rs.76,000/- was coming from Madhya Pradesh to Habibganj railway station in Bhopal Express Train to reach at Nizamudin (Delhi). In the way as the journey was long being night time, the complainant slept, due to which some pickpocket/ thief in the train cut the pocket of the complainant and took way the amount of Rs.76,000/- and the complainant came to know about this at Delhi railway station. The pickpocket cut the pocket of the complainant near Mathura as at Mathura junction, the train stopped. The FIR No.20150010 dated 29.11.2015 was lodged in PS GRP Kurukshetra. It is further averred that the complainant had given documents to Shri Manish, Advocate who came on visit in jail at Kaithal in time to file the case, but he returned the documents with the advised to file the complaint before consumer forum, Kurukshetra. The complainant supplied the documents to Shri Naresh Rana, Advocate who came in jail for visit and he also returned the documents to file the case through jail authority before Consumer Forum, Kurukshetra and as the complainant is in jail, so the legal aid could not be granted to the complainant immediately due to which there is delay of about two years six months as the incident relates to 28.11.2015 which is beyond the control of complainant and separate application is being filed with the affidavit to condone the delay. It is further averred that complainant requested the ops several times to pay the amount of Rs.76,000/- to the complainant but the ops flatly refused to pay the same to the complainant and thus they have caused harassment and deficiency in service to the complainant. Hence, this complaint. Alongwith the complaint an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act has also been filed for condonation of delay on the above said grounds.

3.             Upon notice, opposite parties no.1 to 3 and 5 did not appear and were proceeded against exparte.

4.             Initially op no.4 appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections regarding locus standi, maintainability, estoppal, cause of action and jurisdiction. It is submitted that complainant has concealed the true and material facts from this Forum, as such he is not entitled to any relief. In fact, the complainant visited to the answering op on 29.11.2015 at about 5.25 p.m., and he disclosed that his amount of Rs.76,000/- has been stolen by anybody near railway station Mathura when he was in the train and on the instruction of complainant, the answering op lodged a FIR bearing no.15 dated 29.11.2015, u/s 379 IPC in PS GRP Kurukshetra and the answering op sent the said matter to concerned police station through S.P. Railway Haryana, at Ambala Cantt. for further necessary action. As such the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed against the answering op. Remaining contents of the complaint are also denied.

5.             It is pertinent to mention here that an application for setting aside exparte order against op no.2 was moved but that application was dismissed. It is also pertinent to mention here that when the case was fixed for evidence of op no.4, none appeared on its behalf and as such op no.4 was also proceeded against exparte.

6.             Learned  counsel for complainant tendered documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10.

7.             We have heard learned counsel for complainant and have perused the case file carefully.

8.             It is own case of the complainant that amount of Rs.76,000/- was stolen from his pocket near Mathura as at Mathura Junction, the train stopped. The complainant is resident of Kaithal District and has also alleged that he is detained in District Jail Kaithal. The complainant has failed to show that as to how this Forum at Kurukshetra has territorial jurisdiction. Simply by lodging FIR in Police Station GRP Kurukshetra does not give rise to the cause of action at Kurukshetra. There is nothing to file show that any part cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum at Kurukshetra.

9.             In view of the above, the present complaint is hereby dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.  

Announced in open Forum:

Dt.:  12.4.2019.

                                                                        (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                        President.

 

 

(Neelam)                   (Sunil Mohan Trikha)        

        Member                             Member