Before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019)

of Telangana, Eruvaka Building, Khairathabad at Hyderabad FAN O.113O F 2019 AGAINSTC C NO.390O F 2016 ON THE FILE OF DISTRICTC OMMISSION-IIH, YDERABAD Between:

The General Manager, South Central Railways, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad. Appellant/Opposite party And Smt B.Vani Kumari W/o K.Jala Rao, Aged about 56 years, Oc: Dy.CPO (Welfare), Headquarters Office, Personnel branch, SCR, Secunderabad.

... Respondent/Complainant Counsel for the Appellant Smt. Vijaya Sagi Counsel for the Respondent Sri V.Gouri Sankara Rao CORAM:

*****

Hon'ble Sri Justice MSK Jaiswal President aud Smt Meena Ramanathan . Member Wednesday, the First day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two Oral Order:

***

This is an appeal preferred by the Opposite party aggrieved by the orders dated 19.12.2018 passed by the District Consumer Forum-I, Hyderabad in CC No.390/2016 in allowing the complaint in part and directing the Opposite party therein to pay Rs.2,50,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from 19.02.2016 till realisation; to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- and compensation of Rs.25,000/-, granting time of (30) days for compliance.

2) For the sake of convenience, the partics are referred to as arrayed in the complaint.

3) It is the case of Complainantthat she is working as Deputy Chief Personnel Officer/Welfare in South Central Railways, headquarters at Secunderabad and she proposed to inspect the Railway Institute at Bitragunta and also the Railway Station, Bitragunta to BZA Division

61tragunta ^to Vijayawada)

on 18.02.2016 and accordingly she intended to board the Train No.12710 Simhapuri Express scheduled from Secunderabad at 2255 hours and the train was scheduled to arrive at Bitragunta Railway Station at 0749 hours 19.02.2016.

on 4)

Accordingly, she boarded the above train 19.02.2016 train on as the was running late. She was travellingin A-1 coach with Berth No.13 vide PNR No.473-6785775.

During the before course of journey, 20 minutes the train reaching to Mahaboobad at 0550 hours, she found her hand bag was stolen by some unknown persons and she brought the k sa e m p e t tw to o th c e e ll n u o la ti r c e m o o f b T il T e E h a a f n te d r s m et a s k , ing search of the bag. In the bag, she Rs.1,600/-, ATM card of SyndicateBank, cash of weighing two gold bangles weighingabout

28 grams, one gold chain

38 grams, one gold chain with mangala sutram weighing about

23 grams, three gold finger rings weighing weighing ⁶ grams and two spectacles worth R 2 s 0 . 6 g ,0 ra 0 m 0 s /- , , gold ear studs Altogether,the worth of items contained in the bag were Rs.3,02,000/-.

5) At the time of occurrence, neither the Railway Protection Force personnel nor the TTE or the bed rolls supplier/coachattendant were available and both the coach doors were kept open in AC-2 tier coach.

She reportedthe matter to the TTE, who in turn brought to the notice of Sr.DCM/SCR over telephone. Further,she gave complaint to the Kavali Government Railway Police Station on 19.02.2016 at 11.00 am, who registered a case ⁱⁿ Cr.No.17/2016u nder Section-379 of IPC. She also gave ^a complaint to the CSC/SC on 23.02.2016 markingcopies to the Secretary ^to General Manager, CCM/SC and CPO/SC and other concerned. Later, ^the GRP/KavaliPolice, transferred ^the case to GRP/ Khammam on the point of jurisdiction,who in turn registered the case in Cr.No.20/2016. So far, no arrest is caused. Due to the negligence and deficiency^of service on the part ^of Oppositeparty, she lost her property. Hence the complaintwith a prayer to direct the Opposite party to pay the amount of Rs.3,02,000/- together with interest @ ^18% p.a. from

19.02.2016 till realisation, award damages of Rs.1,00,000/- and costs of the complaint.

6) Opposite party filed its written version contending that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of proper and necessary party i.e.