Northern Railways vs PRAKASH CHANDRA

IT is an interesting case. The respondent was holding a valid ticket by way of reservation of four berths in Coach No. S-7, Train No. 9733 from Delhi Cantt. to Jhunjhunu. On reaching Delhi Cantt. Railway Station on 11.3.1998 to board the train at 23.25 hours, the respondent with his family approached coach No. S-7 but it was found closed from inside and the passengers did not open the doors despite personal request as the compartment was packed to the doors. Having failed to board the train, the respondent who was to reach his native place along with his family members had to travel by road and incurred extra expenses and suffered mental agony and harassment.

HOLDING the appellant guilty for deficiency in service, the District Forum has vide impugned order dated 2.11.1999 directed the appellant to refund amount of the tickets amounting to Rs. 372 and Rs. 240 respectively to the respondents and Rs. 2,500 as compensation to each of the respondents totalling Rs. 10,000 and Rs. 1,000 as cost of litigation. Through this appeal, the appellant has assailed the impugned order mainly on the ground that there is an independent remedy available to such passengers under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act and secondly, that one such passenger who was holding the RAC ticket boarded the same Coach No. S-7 at Delhi Cantt. Railway Station and this shows that the door was open and the possibility of the respondent having reached late after the train had left cannot be ruled out. As regards the contention of the Counsel for the appellant that separate remedy under the Railway Tribunal Act is available to the passenger it does not hold water as the remedy under this Act is limited in nature whereas under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, remedies are not only of many kinds but are independent and in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Under the Consumer Protection Act, consumer is entitled for compensation as to the loss or injury suffered him due to the negligence of the opposite party. Injury includes mental agony suffered by the Consumer.

Whenever a consumer purchases tickets of reserved berths, it is the duty of the appellant-Railway to provide not only the access to the compartment but also the reserved berths. It appears to be case of bad management. In the coach where the seats are reserved, concerned officials of the appellant-department are required to be present and see that every passenger having valid ticket and reserved berths enter into the compartment and is also provided seat. This is the minimum requirement for protecting the interests of the consumers from undergoing untold hardships at the hands of such providers of service like the Railway, airlines, etc. and that is why high standards of service have been provided by the statute. Any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the manner of performance of its obligation amounts to deficiency in service entitling the consumer for compensation as to the loss or injury suffered by him. The concerned District Forum and thereafter the file be consigned to the Record Room. 8. A copy of this order be also sent to all the Presidents of the District Forum for future guidance. Appeal dismissed.