Union of India vs DERBY TEXTILE

UNDER Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ("the Act" herein) this appeal has been filed and it is directed against the order dated 9.1.1991 passed by the District Forum, Jodhpur in Complaint Case No. 681/89 by which the preliminary objection relating to jurisdiction was over-ruled. Even if no appeal is maintainable under Section 15 of the Act, it can be treated as a revision under Section 17(b) of the Act.

WE may briefly notice the facts leading to this appeal/revision. The complainant-respondent alleged that in the month of June, 1988 Coal was sent to it through R/R No. 474823 dated 13.6.1988. As per R/R. No. 474823, 58.9 tonnes coal was loaded in the railway wagons at Rajnagar, District Shahdol (M.P.) and the coal was required to be delivered to the complainant at Bhagat-ki-Kothi, Jodhpur. The complainant asked the railway authorities to weigh the coal before the delivery. By order dated 1.9.1988 the railway authorities directed to deliver the goods to the complainant after weighing it. On weighing the total coal received through R/R. No. 474823, it was found that the coal was short by 9.8 tonnes inasmuch as only 49.1 tonnes coal was received at Bhagat-ki-Kothi. The complainant demanded compensation from the Divisional Superintendent, Northern Railway, Jodhpur about the shortage of the coal. The railway authorities had issued R/R for 58.9 tonnes of the coal. The complainant, therefore, approached the Divisional Commercial Superintendent for the payment of the shortage of the coal, but later he however, refused the request of the complaint and declined to entertain the claim. Notice was sent through the Counsel but the opposite parties dismissed the claim of the complainant. The complainant, therefore, filed the complaint that it is entitled to receive the payment of the shortage of the coal i.e. Rs. 9,800/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.m. The opposite parties submitted reply on 19.7.1990 contesting the complaint. Under the head additional plea, an objection was taken that the claim of the complainant made in the complaint should be adjudicated by the Claims Tribunal under the provisions of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 ("the Act of 1987") and no other Forum has jurisdiction to entertain such claims. The District Forum, Jodhpur heard the arguments and passed the impugned order ever ruling the preliminary objections. It held that the Redressal Forum has jurisdiction to entertain, hear and decide the claim. Hence this appeal/revision.

We heard Mr. D.M. Lodha, learned Counsel for the appellant in the revision petition, as nobody has appeared on behalf of the complaint-respondent and considered the order in the light of the submissions made by the learned Counsel. The preamble of the Act of 1987 reads as under : "An Act to provide for the establishment of a Railway Claims Tribunal for inquiring into the 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 injury to passengers occurring as a result of railway accidents and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto".

Section 13 of the Act deals with jurisdiction, powers and authority of Claims Tribunal, Section 13 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 Claims Commissioner appointed under the provisions of the Railways Act,- (a) relating to the responsibility of the railway administrations as Carriers under Chapter VII of the Railway Act in respect of claims for - (i) compensation for loss, destruction, damages, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods entrusted to a railway administration for carriage by railway; (ii) compensation payable under Section 82-A of the Railways Act or the rules made thereunder; and (b) in respect of the claims forrefund of fares or part thereof or for refund of any freight paid in respect of animals or goods en trusted to a railway administration to be carried by railway. (2) The provisions of the Railways Act and the rules made thereunder shall, so far as may be, be applicable to the inquiring into or determining, and claims by the Claims Tribunal under this Act."

Section 15 of the Act of 1987 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, powers or authority in relation to the matters referred to in Sub-section (1) of Section 13."

THE Act of 1987 had already come into force on the date when the complaint was filed. A perusal of Section 15 of the Act of 1987 shows that a Court or any other authority in relation to the matters referred to Section 13 of the Act of 1987 is debarred from exercising jurisdiction, powers or authority. THEre is thus a complete bar of jurisdiction. Section 3 of the Act 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. Section 3 of the Act does not help the complainant and it is not of any avail as Section 15 of the Act of 1987 completely ousts the jurisdiction of the Court or any other authority. THE Act of 1987 had come into force after the Act has come into force. Section 28 of the Act of 1987 may usefully be referred to which is as under : "28. Act to have overriding effect-THE provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act." At the time of filing of the complaint, the Act of 1987 was in force and the Claims Tribunal have already been established. For these reasons the complaint cannot be entertained, heard and determined by the District Forum, Jodhpur. THE District Forum was not justified in taking a contrary view. The appeal/revision succeeds and the order dated 9.1.1991 is set aside. The District Forum, Jodhpur is directed to return the complaint alongwith the documents to the complainant after retaining their photo stat copies. An endorsement on the complaint shall be made in respect of date of presentation, date of order and return. In the circumstances of the case there will be no order as to costs. Appeal/Revision allowed.