Skip to main content

Can't Fine Railways for Equipment Malfunction During Journey - Consumer Forum

Public services like railways cannot be penalized if some equipments relating to comforts of passengers malfunction during journey, a consumer forum here has said while dismissing a senior citizen's plea against the Northern Railway.

New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, dismissed the plea of one M Lalla against the Northern Railway, while noting that the fans were in working condition at the time of departure of the train.

"The investigation report indicates that fans were in working condition at time of departure but became inoperative en route the journey.

"Public services like railways cannot be penalized if some equipments relating to the comforts of passengers malfunction during journey," the forum said.

In its order, the forum also noted that Lalla was helped by railway official, i.e. TTE in trying to repair defective fan though he was unsuccessful in his efforts.

"If equipments were in an operative state at the beginning of the journey, it would lead to inference of negligence," the forum added.

The forum was hearing the complaint filed by Lalla that he was travelling with other senior citizens on Malwa Express from Jalandhar to New Delhi on September 25, 2008.

He said that two out of three fans were not working thereby making the journey uncomfortable for him and his associates.

Thereafter, he filed a complaint with the railways and later with the forum.

The railways, however, had stated that all the fans were in working condition as per record but they might have got defective en route.

 Article referred: http://www.outlookindia.com/news/article/Cant-Fine-Railways-for-Equipment-Malfunction-During-Journey/872865

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there
Post a Comment
Read more

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t
Post a Comment
Read more

Jurisdiction of consumer forum is not ousted even if the other party has filed suit on the same matter in Civil Court

In Yashwant Rama Jadhav v. Shaukat Hussain Shaikh, First Appeal No. 1229 of 2017, decided on 18.11.2017,  the grievance of the petitioner before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was that appellants/complainants had entered into agreements with the respondents for purchase of residential flats, which the respondents were to construct and despite paying the substantial amount to the respondents, the construction of the flats had not been completed. The State Commission dismissed the complaints and ruled in favor of respondents against which the appellants approached the National Commission. The NCDRC held that Section ‘3’ of the Consumer Protection Act, to the extent it is relevant provides that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Thus the remedy available under the Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy, which Parliament has made available to a consumer. Even
Post a Comment
Read more