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

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...
Post a Comment
Read more

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/
Post a Comment
Read more

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more