Sai Traders vs Union of India

THE complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 read with Section 17(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the ''Act'') against the Union of India through the General Manager, Northern Railway, New Delhi and Others on 4.5.1992 praying that the complainant may be awarded a sum of Rs. 2,28,062/- alongwith interest @ 21 % p.a. as detailed in Para No.15 of the complaint.

AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the respondents, we have come to the conclusion that the State Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the complaint under Section 15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. It is not necessary to state the facts in detail. Suffice it to mention that the complainant had booked 40/60 coal wagons of Khassi Maghalaya Coal with the respondents at New Gohati (N.G.C.) Railway Station for carrying the same to Goniana Railway Station (Punjab) and that when the first consignment reached Goniana Railway Station, the respondent No. 3 charged the complainant ''Under Charges'' for excess weight to the tune of Rs. 34,300/- and the said amount was paid to them under protest. Similarly thereafter on various dates as mentioned in Para No. 4 of the complaint, the complainant had to pay the Under charges'' to the tune of Rs. 93,762/- to the respondents in order to avoid penalty, theft, pilferage of coal and the economic loss. The complainant''s case is that they had issued notice to the respondents for the refund of the aforesaid amounts charged as ''Under Charges'' and their claim was repudiated by the Railway Authorities while passing a non-speaking and arbitrary order. This compliant was filed on May 4,1992. On notice being issued, the respondents stoutly defended the complaint by raising a preliminary objection that this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain and try this complaint. There appears to be substance in his contention.

When the case is called for hearing, neither the complainant nor his representative has appeared. Mr. Jagdish Marwaha, Advocate for the respondents has appeared and he has strenuously urged that the complaint be rejected as barred under Section 15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.

THE Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 for the sake of brevity, hereinafter will be referred to as the Act No. 50 of 1987. Preamble of the Act of 1987 is as follows:- "An Act to provide for the establishment of a Railway Claims Tribunal for inquiring into and determining claims against a railway administration for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods entrusted to it to be carried by railway or for the refund of fares or freight or for compensation for death or injuries to passengers occurring as a result of railway accidents and for matters concerned therewith or incidental thereto."

Sec. 13 of the Act No. 50 of 1987 deals with jurisdiction, powers and authority of Claims Tribunal. Sec. 13(1), material for our purpose, is as follows:- "13. Jurisdiction, powers and authority of Claims Tribunal -(1) The Claims Tribunal shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, all such jurisdiction, powers and authority, as were exercisable immediately before that day by any Civil Court or a Claim Commissioner appointed under the provisions of the Railways Act. (a) (i)""" (ii) " " " (b) in respect of the claims for refund or part thereof or for refund of any freight paid in respect of animals or goods entrusted to a railway administration to be carried by railway."

SEC. 15 of the Act deals with bar of jurisdiction. It is as under:- "15. Bar of jurisdiction, "on and from the appointed day, no Court or other Authority shall have, or be entitled to, exercise any jurisdiction, power or authority in relation to the matters referred to in Subsection (1) of SECtion 13."

Chapter IV of the Act No. 50 of 1987 provides for procedure. SEC. 16 deals with application to Claims Tribunal. SEC. 17 is for limitation and SEC. 18 provides procedure and powers of Claims Tribunal. It is not in dispute that the Act had come into force on the date, the complaint was filed and the Claims Tribunal has been established under SEC. 3 of the Act No. 50 of 1987. A perusal of SEC. 15 shows that a Court or any other authority cannot exercise jurisdiction, powers or authority in relation to the matters referred to in Sub-SECtion (1) of SECtion 13 of the Act No. 50 of 1987. The subject matter of the complaint and the reliefs asked for by the complainant are matters referred to in Sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. There is a complete bar of jurisdiction. Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides that the provisions of the Act are in addition to and not in derogation of any other law for the time being in force. It cannot be of any avail, for Section 15 of the Act No. 50 of 1987 completely ousts the jurisdiction of the Court and any other authority. The complaint filed by the complainant on account of bar of jurisdiction under Section 15 of the Act No. 50 of 1987 cannot be entertained, tried or decided by the State Commission under the Act. The complaint is, therefore, dismissed on this ground alone. The complainant, if advised may peruse other remedy according to law. In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. Complaint dismissed.