P S SANDHU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case is a sequel to an unfortunate boat tragedy that took place at Barapani Lake near Shillong on 24th October, 1991. This complaint has been filed by W/C P.S. Sandhu of the Western Air Command, New Delhi and his two minor children, Mater Guneet Singh Sandhu, aged 13 years and Ms. Jasleen Sandhu, aged 11 years. The three complainants alongwith late Mrs. Guddi Sandhu were members of a group consisting of Air Force Officers and members of their families who had gone for a boat cruise in the Barapani Lake as part of a picnic programme on the ill-fated day. The picnic was organised by some of the officers of Headquarters, Eastern Air Command at the Electricity Board Guest House near Barapani Lake. A Boat Club is maintained at Barapani Lake by the Army Authorities of Army 101 Area Base near Shillong.

(2.) THE opposite parties in this complaint are: (1) Union of India represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi; (2) Army Headquarters, represented by Chief of Army Staff, new Delhi; (3) General Officer Commanding, 101 Area, C/O 99 APO; and (4) Manager, Boat Club, 58, G.T.C., (Gorkha Training Centre), C/O 99 APO (Shillong).

(3.) ON behalf of the Opposite Parties a detailed counter affidavit has been filed by Major Raj Parmar of G.T.C. A preliminary objection has been taken therein that the complainants are not consumers within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 since no payment has been made by them nor have the respondents offered any services to the complainants for consideration. Another plea taken is that W/C Bhatia who was a member of the complainants' group and was incharge of the arrangements at Barapani Lake had executed an indemnity bond on behalf of the members of the picnic party " Annexure R-l and by the terms of the said bond the Opposite Parties are absolved of any liability. Yet another contention raised in the counter affidavit is that a Court of Inquiry was constituted under the Air Force Act to inquire into all aspects of the tragic occurrence and the recommendation made by the Court of Inquiry as per its findings dated 5th December, 1991 was that no person or organisation be blamed for the accident The allegation made in the complaint petition that the boat was overloaded has been denied by the Opposite Parties and it is stated that the specified capacity of the boat is 16 Army soldiers with full battle load and two crew members. Of the passengers carried in the boat on the ill-fated day 8 were adults and the remaining 7 were only children, and hence, the total load carried in the boat was much below the full capacity of 1,800 kgs. The Opposite Parties have raised a plea in defence that the movements of the occupants of the boat had "solely contributed to the accident" and there was no defect of any kind in the boat. Reliance was also placed on the fact that an indemnity bond had been executed by W/C Bhatia and in view of the stipulations contained therein it was not open to the Complainants to make any claim against the Government of India or any officers or employees of the Government.