Back
K. RANGA RAO, R. S. RAJESHREE
Government Railways, Ministry of Railways – Appellant
Versus
Sabastian Leo Raj – Respondent
ORDER
This appeal is preferred by the Appellant/Opposite party 1, U/s. 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, praying this State Commission to allow the appeal and to set aside the impugned order of the District Forum-II, Hyderabad passed in CC. No. 418/2017 dt.22.04.2019 and consequently to dismiss the complaint of the complainant.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the complaint. The appellant herein was opposite party No. 1. The first respondent in this appeal was the complainant and the second and third respondent in this appeal were opposite parties 2 and 3.
For the sake of clarity at the very outset it is to be mentioned here that though initially the complainant filed the complaint CC.No.418/2017 against opposite parties 1 to 3, subsequently the complainant vide a memo dt.23.02.2018 not pressed the claim against opposite parties 2 and 3 as such at the threshold itself the District Forum dismissed the claim against opposite parties 2 and 3 basing on the said memo.
3. The brief facts of complaint are as follows:-
The complainant is working in M/s. VAG Valves Ltd., Hyderabad as a Manager-Supply Chain Management, vide ID. No. 214817. He recei
Theft in Railway – Valuable articles not booked with Railways & receipt not obtained – No deficiency of services on the part of Railways.
(1) Railway Administration bears responsibility under Railways Act as well as Consumer Protection Act to ensure safety of passengers and their belongings during transit.(2) When theft occurs on a run....
Railway will be responsible for theft or loss of luggage carried by passengers in reserved Coach if it is established that such loss or theft occurred due to negligence or misconduct on part of Railw....
(1) Railways – Railways will be responsible for the theft or loss of the luggage carried by passengers in the reserved Coach if it is established that such loss or theft occurred due to negligence or....
Immunity – It is the settled law that immunity of the Railways under Section 100 of the Railways Act is of no consequence in the event of actual negligence and deficiency in service.
Theft in Train cannot be considered deficiency in service on part of Railways.
The responsibility for protecting personal belongings lies with the passenger and does not constitute a deficiency in service by the Railways.
Negligence must be proven for railway liability under Section 100 of the Railways Act, 1989.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
