CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and Commissions(1993) 11 NCDRC CK 0021

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY vs G.GUNASEKHARAN

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 4 November 1993 · Citation: 1994 1 CPJ 346 : 1994 2 CPR 419

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.A.Kader , R.N.Manickam , Ramani Mathuranayagam J.
RESULT
Appeal allowed
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 339 words
1.

THE appeal is directed against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tirunelveli dated 2.11.92 in O.P. 215/91. THE opposite party is the appellant.

2.

THE case of the complainant is that he had reserved a second class sleeper in Quil on Mail for his travel from Sankarancoil to Madras on 11.11.91. His coach No. was 57 and his berth No. was 7. But the sleeper coach was not attached to that train on that day. THE complainant suffered much mental pain and hardship and has came forward with this complaint for claiming compensation in the sum of Rs. 5,000/-. The opposite party contended that due to mechanical defects, the coach was not attached and a refund certificate has been issued to the complainant for refunding sleeper charges of Rs. 25/-.

The District Forum did hot accept this contention and awarded in the sum of Rs. 500/- as compensation and Rs. 250/- towards costs. Hence this appeal.

3.

THE Learned Counsel for the appellant invited our attention to the judgment in Southern Railway v. Ariff Mohammed (A.P. 268/93) and General Manager, Southern Railway v. Manoharan (A.P. 315/93) where this Commission has held that if a particular compartment was not attached due to mechanical defects, there was no deficiency of service or negligence on the part of the opposite party. THEse decisions submitted before us are to the point. An affidavit has been filed by the Station Master of Sankaran koil that due to mechanical defect coach No. 57 could not be attached to that train on that day. THEre is no reason to doubt the veracity of this affidavit. In these circumstances, it cannot be held that the opposite party was guilty of deficiency of service or negligence. THE District Forum has not appreciated this aspect of the matter. THE order of the District Forum cannot therefore stand. In the result, the appeal is allowed, the order of the District Forum is set aside and the complaint is dismissed, but without costs throughout. Appeal allowed. ______________