SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

UNION TERRITORY CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Hon’ble Dr. P.K. Vasudeva, President &
Mrs. Devinderjit Dhatt, Member
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.—Appellants
versus
M.B. NAYYAR & ANR.—Respondents
Appeal No. 254 of 2000—Decided on 6.6.2001

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants :Mr. Jagdish Marwaha, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Sanjay Judge, Advocate.

The main legal point established is that the Railway Administration's failure to provide confirmed first-class seats amounts to a deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act.

Headnote:

Consumer Protection Act - Railway Service - Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - [Section 15] - The judgment discusses the deficiency in service by the Railway Administration in failing to provide a first-class coach for confirmed ticket holders, leading to inconvenience, discomfort, and health issues for the passengers. The court upheld the District Forum's decision, emphasizing the negligence and deficiency in service by the Railways.

Fact of the Case:

The complainants had booked first-class seats for a train journey, but upon arrival, they found no first-class compartment attached to the train. They were forced to travel in a jam-packed second-class coach, leading to discomfort and health issues for the elderly passengers.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Railway Administration was negligent in issuing confirmed tickets for first class and then failing to provide the service, leading to inconvenience and health issues for the passengers.

Issues: The main issue was the deficiency in service by the Railway Administration and the negligence in failing to provide the confirmed first-class seats to the passengers.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Railway Administration's failure to provide the confirmed first-class seats amounted to a deficiency in service, leading to inconvenience and health issues for the passengers.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the District Forum's decision and emphasizing the established deficiency in service by the Railway Administration.

ORDER

Dr. P.K. Vasudeva, President—This appeal has been filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 [for short hereinafter referred to as the C.P. Act] for setting aside the impugned order dated 3.10.2000 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh [for short hereinafter referred to as the District Forum-I] in Complaint Case No. 845/97-99/2000. The District Forum-I allowed the complaint and ordered the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant on account of compensation and costs. Aggrieved against the order passed by the District Forum-I, the present appeal has been preferred by the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 i.e. Union of India, through its General Manager, Northern Railways, Baroda House, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi and Station Superintendent, Railway Station, Chandigarh.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may briefly be narrated in the succeeding paragraphs :

3. The complainants/respondents i.e. Shri M.B. Nayyar and Mrs. Raj Kumari Sekhri are the residents of House No. 5784, Modern Complex, Manimajra, U.T., Chandigarh. The complainants/respondents aged 60 and 80 years respectively, booked two first class seats in advance for a journey commencing on 24.7.1997 from Chandigarh to Rohtak (Haryana) vide train No. 4096, dated 24.7.1997, bearing PNR No. 230-838/93038 and ticket No. 47489629 in Himalayan Queen/Ekta Express train. The reservation for the 1st Class was confirmed and the complainants/respondents were allotted Coach No. F-1 (Coupey B) by the opposite parties/appellants. On the scheduled date of journey i.e. 24.7.1997, the complainants/respondents reached Chandigarh Railway Station in connection with the boarding of the said train as per schedule at 17.35 hrs. (5.35 p.m.) and were shocked to find no 1st Class compartment on the arrival of the train inspite of the fact that their names figured on the chart displayed at the station. After getting no assistance from anybody, the complainants/respondents enquired from the Guard of the train Sh. R.P. Singh, who informed the complainants/respondents that no 1st class compartment/coach was attached to the said train on 24.7.1997 and asked the complainants/respondents to board any ordinary 2nd Class coach of the train since the train was about to leave. The Guard also issued a certificate mentioning that no 1st Class is attached to 4010DN Ekta express/Himalayan Queen train. The complainants in utter disgust and helplessness per force managed to board an ordinary 2nd class jam-packed coach of the said train without a seat and had to travel standing till Ambala. On reaching Ambala, the complainant No. 2 on account of tension, strain and stress and congestion in the coach, developed uneasiness and high blood pressure since she was already a patient of high blood pressure and in order to avoid all such difficulties ad problem, she along with complainant No. 1 had preferred to travel by the upper class whichever available since there was no seat available in the A.C. Class even till Panipat as there is no A.C. coach available for onwards journey to Rohtak etc. The complainant No. 1/ respondent No. 1 had to call for his personal car from Chandigarh to reach back Chandigarh, thereby the discomfort caused on account of the grave negligence on the part of Railways had to force the complainants/respondents to abandon their journey at Ambala and return thereby causing inconvenience, discomfort resulting into ill-health of complainant No. 2/respondent No. 2 besides monitary loss. The relatives of the complainants/respondents who had been informed about the arrival of the train at Rohtak became worried and frantic enquiries and telephone calls at Rohtak Railway Station were made and subsequently they came to know the date of the complainants/respondents. The complainants/respondents had to suffer irreparable loss resulting into sickness, discomfort, inconvenience, mental agony and harassment on account of the unimaginable





































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top