The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has upheld an order of state commission asking railways to pay a passenger Rs 2.37 lakh for loss of their jewellery and cash due to theft while travelling in train. Forum has, however, reduced interest payable on said amount from 12% per annum to 6%.
The division railway manager of Western Railway in Vadodara had challenged the State Commission's order which had also awarded passengers compensation of Rs10000 and costs of Rs 2000.
The matter pertained to a theft that happened in train no 12229, Goa Sampark Kranti Express on July 16. The couple who were on their way from Goa to Ratlam was allotted two berths in coach A-1 of second AC category. They went to sleep at 11.30 pm when the train was at Panvel Railway Station. The wife had kept her gold and silver jewellery in a small purse and a money purse with cash of 20,000 under her pillow which was found missing when the train reached Vadodara the next day. The AC attendant and ticket checker asked them to file a complaint with the Railway Police Station, Vadodara,
The counsel for passengers argued that theft took place because unauthorised personnel were allowed in reserved compartment and this shows deficiency in service.
The Railways denied and argued that complainants did not book their luggage nor did they declare about the items they carried and hence passengers and not railways were responsible for their luggage. The forum also found that railways had not carried an inquiry if complainants had not complained to TTE.
The forum said that railways themselves had admitted that hand purse was never booked as cargo in luggage van and in fact was being carried by the passengers as a personal item. Therefore, contention that complainant did not declare items in luggage cannot be sustained.
The court observed that while the railways denied that any unauthorised personnel had entered the coach, they did not make an inquiry even after the passengers formally lodged an FIR regarding the theft.
TRAIN TRAVAIL
- The couple who were on their way from Goa to Ratlam was allotted two berths in coach A-1 of second AC category.
- The counsel for passengers argued that theft took place because unauthorised personnel were allowed in reserved compartment.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Goa Sampark Kranti Express")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}