SAVITRI AVASTHI Vs. GENERAL MANAGER NORTHERN RAILWAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed assailing the orders of District Forum, New Delhi dated 8.10.1999 passed in Complaint Case No.1563/1995 - entitled Smt. Savitri Avasthi V/s. General Manager, Northern Railways.

(2.) The brief facts, leading to the filing of the present appeal, are that the appellant had filed a complaint before the District Forum under Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), averring therein that the appellant was travelling from Kharagpur to New Delhi on 12.12.1994 in Neelanchal Express, and there was no electricity in the evening in the train. When the said train reached New Delhi Station on 13.12.1994 the appellant realized that one brief-case containing valuables was missing. The appellant had been unable to take care of all her belongings on account of the fact that there was no light in the coach. The appellant lodged a complaint with the Railway Authorities, as well as, in the Police Station vide FIR No.1137/1994 dated 14.12.1994. Since no action was taken by the Railway Authorities, the appellant approached the District Forum for compensation of loss suffered by her.

(3.) The O. P. in its reply/written version filed before the District Forum denied the contention of the appellant that there was no light in the bogie in which the appellant was travelling and that there was deficiency in service on its part. It was also stated by the respondent in its reply/written version filed before the District Forum that in view of the provisions of Sec.100 of Railways Act, 1989 , in cases where the luggage is carried by the passengers in their personal charge, the Railway Administration is not responsible for the loss, destruction or damage to the luggage unless the same is on account of negligence or misconduct on the part of the Railways or any of its agents, and as such, in the instant case the responsibility for the loss of luggage of the appellant was not the responsibility of the Railway Authorities. Therefore, the complaint, filed by the appellant, being devoid of merit was liable to be dismissed.