Exclusive jurisdiction of the Railway Claims Tribunal under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 in cases related to compensation for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration, or non-delivery of goods entrusted to a Railway administration for carriage by Railway.

Mr. Justice A.P. Chowdhri, President— Shri Kishan Gupta, hereinafter referred to as the complainant, appears to be carrying on the business of outdoor catering. He received an order for making arrangements in connection with certain function to be held at Ahmed Nagar from 2.12.92 to 3.12.92. He booked some cooking material and utensils by Karnatka Express on 29.11.92. Separately a team of 18 cooks and waiters were sent by train. The aforesaid material and utensils were not delivered at the destination until 29.1.93. The complainant claimed compensation amounting of Rs. 71,167/-. The General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House was arrayed as opposite party. The opposite party failed to appear and by an ex-parte order District Forum-I directed the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/ -. Aggrieved by the order, the opposite party has preferred this revision petition.

2. The main contention being that the District Forum had exercised jurisdiction not vested in it. We have heard Mr. S.P. Sharma, Advocate for the revision petitioner. Mr. Sharma has contended that jurisdiction of the FORA constituted under the Consumer Protection Act is barred in view of the provisions of Sections 13,15 and 28 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. We find force in the contention. Section 13 of the said Act lays down that the Claims Tribunal constituted under the Act shall exercise jurisdiction, powers and authority as were exercisable immediately before the appointed day by any Civil Court or a Claims Commission appointed under the provisions of the Railway Act. In broad such claims related to compensation for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non/- delivery of goods entrusted to a Railway administration for carriage by Railway. Section 15 bars the jurisdiction of any Court or ‘other authority’ Section 28 gives overriding effect to the provisions of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 over others laws to the contrary. It follows that the exclusive jurisdiction in the present case vests in the Claims Tribunal under the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987. This conclusion finds support from an earlier decision of this Commission in S.C. Gupta v. G.M., Northern Railway & Others, C-16/94 decided on 20.9.94 and the National Commission in M/s. Mukesh Enterprises v. Chief Commercial Supdt. (Claims), Revision Petition No. 197/92 dated 4.3.93.

3. We accordingly, allow the revision petition and direct that the complainant may, if so advised, have his remedy according to law before the Claims Tribunals aforesaid. As a result, the order of the District Forum is set aside and the complaint filed by the respondent before the District Forum stands dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs throughout. A copy of this order be communicated to both the parties as well as D.F.-I.

Revision petition allowed.