BALA CHANDRAKANT Vs. NORTHERN RAILWAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -IN this revision, against the order dated 14. 2. 2006 of State Commission, Delhi, the petitioner seeks increase in the amount as awarded by the State Commission.

(2.) ONLY few facts need to be noticed for deciding this revision. Petitioner/complainant and her family boarded Tamil Nadu Express (Coach S-1) on 6. 4. 1998 at 8. 30 p. m. at New Delhi Railway Station. As soon as the train moved from the platform, the gold chain with mangalsutra worn by the petitioner was snatched by a person stretching his hand through the window from outside who was seen standing on the footboard of the adjacent exit door of the coach. Petitioner's husband reported the matter to the Train Supervisor and lodged FIR with GRP. Complaint was later on filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of respondent/opposite party Railways by the petitioner which was contested by the respondent. By the order dated 29. 11. 2000, the District Forum dismissed the complaint. Appeal against Forum's order preferred by the petitioner was allowed by the State Commission relying on the decision in R. P. No. 1158 of 2001, Mrs. M. Kanthimathi and Anr. v. Government of India, Ministry of Railways, represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway, Chennai, decided on 8. 11. 2002 by this Commission and awarding amount of Rs. 5,000 as compensation to the petitioner holding the Railways to be deficient in service.

(3.) SHORT submission advanced by the petitioner was that the State Commission while awarding compensation did not consider that the weight of lost gold chain was five tolas and even after having found the Railways to be deficient in service no cost was awarded to her. On the other hand, relying on the decision in R. P. No. 858 of 2005, Smt. Chandrika v. North Zone Indian Railways and Ors. , decided on 31. 1. 2006, it was urged by Mr. S. A. Sattar for the respondent that the petitioner is not entitled to any compensation and the complaint itself was liable to be dismissed. In our view, there is no merit in the submission advanced by Mr. Sattar as the respondent. Railways has not assailed the validity of the order of State Commission by filing revision. Copies of complaint and affidavit filed by way of evidence before the District Forum are placed on record. In para No. 2 of the affidavit, the petitioner has averred that the weight of the lost gold chain with mangalsutra has five tolas which fact has not been controverted on affidavit by the Railways. Considering the weight of lost gold chain and the facts and circumstances of case, we deem it proper to award a consolidated amount of Rs. 25,000 including cost to the petitioner.