UNION OF INDIA & ANR Vs. LAKSHIT JOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the Petitioner, Union of India and others against order dated 21.9.2015 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab ( for short, State Commission) in First Appeal No.1033 of 2012.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/Respondent filed complaint before the learned District Consumer Forum, Amritsar against the Opposite Parties/Petitioners alleging inter alia that he is studying in Mumbai and on 11.12.2010 he was travelling in Train No.2904 Golden Temple Mail, Coach No.AB-1 with Seat No.2 from Amritsar to Mumbai and boarded at Amritsar. When the said train reached and halted at Nizamuddin Station on 12.12.2010 at about 7.30 a.m. the complainant went to washroom for 3-4 minutes and when he returned back to his seat, he found that his bag was stolen. Complainant lodged a complaint regarding theft of his belongings to Sh. Namoo Ram, T.T. posted at DCTI office, Platform No.2, Kota Junction. The stolen bag was containing Laptop, Wallet, PAN Card, Driving Licence, two ATM cards, Medical Insurance Card, Old College Identity Card, watch, notebook, magazine, Parker Pen, Pen drive, Tata Photon USB Modem, two CDS etc. Complaint lodged FIR No.6 dated 23.1.2011 u/s 379 IPC before the Police Station at Hazarat Nizamuddin Railway Station. Hence, with the aforesaid facts, the complainant filed the Complaint Case No.638 of 2011 before the District Forum, Amritsar on 3.8.2011 against the petitioners claiming total compensation of Rs.1.50 lacs besides cost of litigation. On being noticed, the petitioners appeared, filed their written statement and vehemently opposed the allegations of the complainant on various grounds. The District Forum after considering submission of both sides, vide order dated 20.6.2012 allowed complaint directing the petitioners to pay compensation of Rs.1.00 lac for loss of bag, Rs.5,000/- for mental harassment and R.2,000/- as cost of litigation. Being aggrieved, the petitioners preferred First Appeal No.1033 of 2012 before the State Commission on 9.8.2012. The State Commission finally heard the matter and vide order dated 21.9.2015 dismissed the appeal of the petitioners and upheld the order of the District Forum.

(3.) Hence, this revision petition.