Punjab

StateCommission

A/735/2017

Raman Dutt - Complainant(s)

Versus

Union of India - Opp.Party(s)

Nakul Sharma

18 Jan 2018

ORDER

        2^Nd ADDITIONAL BENCH

STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No. 735 of 2017

                                                          Date of Institution:  24.10.2017

                                                          Date of reserved  :05.01.2018

                                                          Date of Decision:  18.01.2018

 

Raman Dutt son of Madan Lal Dutt, Resident of 8, Green Model Town, Jalandhar, previously residing at Central Mills, Old Railway Road, Jalandhar.

                                                           appellant/complainant

Versus

1. Union of India, through Secretary, Minister of Railways, New Delhi.
2. Northern Railways, Ferozepur Railway Station, Ferozepur through its General Manager.
3. Station Master, Jalandhar Railway Station, Jalandhar.

                                                           Respondents/opposite parties

First Appeal against order dated  20.09.2017 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,  
Jalandhar.

Quorum:-

          Shri Gurcharan Singh Saran, Presiding Judicial Member.

         Shri Rajinder Kumar Goyal, Member

Present:-

          For the appellant          :         Sh.Nakul Sharma,Advocate        

 

RAJINDER KUMAR GOYAL MEMBER

ORDER

                   The appellant/complainant (hereinreferred to as complainant) has filed the present appeal against the order dated 20.09.2017passed in Consumer Complaint No.141 of 2015by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,  Jalandhar (herein referred as District Forum) vide which the complaint filed by the complainant waspartly accepted and Ops were directed to pay compensation to the complainant to  the tune of Rs.20,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5000/- further directed that entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the order.

2.                Complaint was filed by the appellant/complainant (hereinafter referred as complainant) under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the OPs on the averments that the complainant had travelled to Delhi byShatabdi train on 07.09.2012 vide PNR No.27078646432, when he was coming back from Delhi in coach No.E2, he suffered jerks and at that time a complaint was given in the complaint register being maintained by the Ticket Travel Examiner (hereinafter referred as TTE). It was clearly mentioned that the jerks were very uncomfortable and it appeared that there were some defects in the coach. Request was also made to rectify the said problem as it can lead to serious injury to the backbone, cervical or disc. The TTE informed that this complaint would be forwarded to the concerned authorities. On 17.02.2015 the complainant had again travelled to Delhi and while coming back from Delhi he was travelling in E1 coach seat No.31. On the said day he also felt heavy jerks in the coach, even the water had spilled on his clothes and he suffered pain in the neck and lower back due to said jerks. Many other passengers were also complaining for the same problem. Complainant again wrote complaint with the TTE. After going through the complaint register, it transpired that many other passengers had also written the similar complaints. After reaching Jalandhar, the complainant had to immediately go to  Chodha Hospital, Jalandhar to get himself medically examined and on examination cervical spondylosis and pain on the lower back was found. The complainant was medically examined and thereafter, remained on medication and bed rest for about 15 days. The problem is persistent and it clearly showed that the coach, whichwas being used was faulty and due to that reason great uncomfortable travelingwas suffered not only by the complainant rather so many other passengers. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, complaint was filed before the District Forum with the prayer that the complaint may be allowed and opposite party be directed to immediately  rectify the fault in coaches. Theybe further directed to pay Rs.1,55,000/- on account of damages and compensation as detailed below:-

1.      Rs.100,000/- as damages for suffering, mental tension and costs of deficiency in service.

          2.      Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses.

          3.      Rs.10,000/- to pay medical bill.

          4.      Rs.20000/- for confining the complainant to bed rest for a

                   period of 15 days.

3.                Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written version, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable against the OPs as there was neither any deficiency in service nor any negligence on the part of the OPs and that the complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious to the knowledge of the complainant. On merits, the allegations made by the complainant were categorically denied by the OPs and further submitted that there is no proof of complainant having cervical spondylosis as a result of travel in the above said train and as such the complaint of the complainant is without merit. Itbe dismissed.

4.                Before the District Forum the parties were allowed to lead their respective evidence.

5.             In support of his allegations, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence two affidavits Ex.CA and Ex.CB along with some documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C17 and then evidence of the complainant was closed by order, vide order dated 30.11.2015. In rebuttal the counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence two affidavits i.e. Ex.OP-A and Ex.OP-B along with some documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-10 and closed the evidence on behalf of the OPs.

6.                After going through the allegations as alleged in the complaint, written version filed by OPs, evidence and documents brought on record, the complaint filed by the complainant was allowed. 7.                    Aggrieved with the order passed by the District Forum, the appellant/opposite party has filed the present appeal.

8.                We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

9.                Counsel for the appellant argued that the deficiency in service is clearly established due to heavy jerks in the E-1 coach of Shatabadi Express Train.The District Forum has observed and accepted the plea of the appellant that there is urgent need of rectifying the fault as heavy jerks in the coaches of the Shatabadi Express train witnessed not only by the appellant, but even by the different commuters who even made respective complaints to the authorities.  Therefore, the District Forum was duty bound to give direction to the respondent authorities to immediately rectify the fault in the coaches. The District Forum has even granted meager compensation of Rs.20,000/- to  the appellant. The appellant suffered cervical spondylosis and paid on the lower back. Also remained on medication and bedrest for 15 days. The counsel prayed for to accept the appeal and to modify the order passed the District Forum to  the extent that the directions be given to the respondent authorities to immediately rectify the fault in the coaches and further compensation may be enhanced to Rs.1 lakh and litigation expenses to Rs.25,000/-.

10.              As regards the directions to the respondent authorities to immediately rectify the fault in coaches, this Commission cannot issue any general directions to the concerned departments. Directions can only be issued for specific deficiency in service by the respondent. The counsel for the complainant during the course of arguments pointed out that the directions may be issued to the respondent authorities to rectify the fault in E1 coach in which the complainant had travelled. As E1 coach does not identify the particular coach number.There may be many coaches namely E1 in railways. To identify a coach a particular number is needed. As such no directions can be issued.

11.              The complainant was prescribed only pain killer medicines on 18.02.2015 at Chodha Hospital. No injury or other radiological X-ray for diagnosis was done by the Doctor. It is evident that only pain killers were needed to subsidize the back pain. The District Forum vide its order dated 20.09.2017 has awarded to refund the amount received by OP from the complainant for travel from New Delhi to Jalandhar, Rs.20,000/- compensation and litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. In view of this the compensation amount awarded is adequate.                 

12.              Sequel to the above, the appeal is dismissed in limine with the liberty to the appellant to approach appropriate court for issuing general directions to the concerned authorities for rectification of coaches. The order of the District Forum is upheld.

13.              Copy of the order be communicated to the parties as per rules. 

                                                                     (Gurcharan Singh Saran)

                                                                   Presiding Judicial Member

 

                                                                  

January  18, 2018                                      (Rajinder Kumar Goyal)

PK/-                                                                     Member