DATE OF JUDGMENT:
15th January, 2021.
JUDGES:
CT Sabu, K. Radhakrishnan Nair, Sreeja S.
PARTIES:
M.M. Babu (Appellant)
Station Suprand, Wadakkanchery Railway Station (Respondent)
SUMMARY
The following Case Deals With The Issue Of Whether Railway Commuters Are Eligible For Compensation After A Delay Of Their Train.
OVERVIEW
- The appellants approached the forum in the year 2013 after a train they were scheduled to travel was delayed. Despite their requests, the railway authorities were unable to provide them with the reasons for the delay.
- The appellants had to make separate arrangements to reach their destination.
- The requests of the appellants for a refund/cancellation were also denied by the railway authorities on the contention that their ticket had to be surrendered to get the Ticket Deposit Receipt before three hours of leaving the train from the station in the case of late coming trains.
ISSUES
The following issues were analyzed by the forum:
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on part of the Railways.
- Whether the commuters were eligible for compensation after delay of their train.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
- Sec. 13(1)(b) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987- Jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Tribunal.
- Sec. 15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987: Bar of jurisdiction.
- Sec. 80 of Civil Procedure Code: Notice for instituting suits against the Government.
- Sec. 8A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986- Definition of District Consumer Redressal Forum.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGMENT
1. The appellants contended that they were totally in the dark and were confused on what to do next. They contended that the requests to avail cancellation or refund of the ticket charges were refused without any valid reasons.
2. The appellants alleged that the railway officials were not equipped and were unable to provide the required information to the complainants as well as passengers to convey the correct information with regard to the timings of arrival or leaving of trains.
3. The appellants contended that the acts of the respondents such as late running of the train and not keeping the punctuality in the scheduled timings of arrival and leaving inability of giving correct information to the passengers including complainants and also not allowing the refund of the ticket charges are very serious lapses amounting to deficiency in service.
4. Aggrieved by the aforementioned acts of the respondents, the appellants stated that they had sent the respondents a legal notice. They alleged that they had received no response from the respondents.
5. The respondents refuted the allegations of the appellants and contended that they were not liable to pay any compensation or cost. They contended that the complaint of the appellants was not bona-fide as they alleged that the objective of the appellants was to enrich themselves.
6. The respondents contended that the Railways is owned and managed by the Government of India and if such claims were to be entertained, it would drain the national exchequer in no time.
7. The respondents contended that consumer forums lack jurisdiction as per the provisions of Sec. 13(1) (b) and Sec. 15 of the Railway Claim Tribunal Act 1987.
8. The forum, on hearing the arguments made by the appellants and the respondents, held that the respondents were liable to pay compensation to the appellants.
9. The forum held that in absence of any contra-evidence on the part of the respondents, it had no option but to fix the blame on the respondents. The forum held that the least expected from the Railway was to intimate the complainants about cancellation of train in order to save him of unnecessary trouble to visit railway station to board train.
10. The forum held that deficiency was proved and compensation was rightly awarded.
CONCLUSION
The issue that the present case deals with is whether railway commuters are eligible for compensation after a delay of their train. The forum, in the present case, held in the positive and declared that the commuters were eligible for compensation.
The forum ordered the respondents to pay Rs. 5000 each to the appellants as compensation. The forum declared that compliance of this order was be made within 30 days from the receipt of this order. The forum held that failing to comply will carry 12% interest on the compensation amount from the date of complaint.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
