Skip to main content

Indian Railways to pay Rs 15,000 to man whose bags were destroyed by rats

Indian Railways has been held deficient by a consumer forum here which directed it to pay Rs 15,000 compensation to a retired serviceman, whose bags were damaged by rats in a train.

New Delhi Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by C K Chaturvedi, asked the Railways to pay the amount to Delhi resident R K Bansal.

"It has happened due to lack of proper maintenance of the compartment by the  loco shed staff where bogies are kept for cleaning and maintenance for further departure but they never bothered to care. Consequently this incident occurred which amounts to be deficiency on the part of Opposite Party (Railways) and lack of supervision of Railway authority," the forum's bench, also comprising its members S R Chaudhary and Ritu Garodia, said.

The forum said that Bansal "unnecessarily suffered loss during journey due to lack of proper maintenance and the cleaning of the compartment".

"Thus, Divisional Railway Manager (DRM), Northern Railway, is held responsible due to lack of proper maintenance at local shed staff or supervision lacking at big junction where hundreds of trains leave every day for journey in which lakhs of people travel for various destinations," the forum said.

Bansal had told the forum that he was travelling on October 8, 2013 by Kerala Express from New Delhi to Ernakulum.

During transit, his bag was damaged by rats in a running train and his clothes were torn into pieces.

Alleging negligence on the part of the competent Railway authority, he lodged a complaint with the forum seeking compensation of Rs 18,400 for damaged goods.

 Article referred: news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&fd=R&ct2=us&usg=AFQjCNGiB1-0sKCCrWHBTQUq4HUEYbDAtQ&clid=c3a7d30bb8a4878e06b80cf16b898331&cid=52778594282489&ei=d6gAVLjwDMmJlAWO3YHQAw&url=http://www.firstpost.com/india/indian-railways-pay-rs-15000-man-whose-bags-destroyed-rats-1686385.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.
2 comments
Read more

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...
2 comments
Read more