Date of Filing: 17.02.2023
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: JAGATSINGHPUR
Present:
1. Mr. P. K. Padhi ……………….. President
2. Mrs. M. Swain ………………. Member
C.C. No.54/2023
Kamala Kanta Ray,
S/o. Prafulla Kumar Ray,
Vill.- Purusottampur,
P.O.- Kortal,
Via- Debidol,
P.S./Dist.- Jagatsinghpur.……… Complainant
Divisional Manager,
Bijawara Division,
South Eastern Railway,
Bijawada- 520008.…..… Opposite party
For Complainant………..Mr. S.C. Mohanty & Associates
Opposite Party………..Ex-parte
Date of Hearing: 13.10.2024 Date of Judgment: 28.11.2024 |
ORDER BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT- MR. P.K. PADHI
JUDGMENT
Complainant is the father of deceased Railway Passenger namely Suryakanta Ray who was a valid passenger from Tirupati to Bhubaneswar on 25.9.2022, who breathed his last on the same day and his dead body was received from berth No.34 in S-7 Coach of Train No.12864 (Yasvanthpur – Howrach) and uploaded in Plat form No.4 of Vijayawada Railway Station.
Notice to opposite party was sent by Regd. Post but the opposite party did not appear and set ex-parte on 08.8.2024. It is not in dispute that the son of complainant expired in the train and opposite party has not responded to the notice of this Commission. Even persons having no ticket, passer by etc. claim from RCT but the complainant’s son died in the train is not in dispute and when the opposite party is callous to the notice of this Commission what service the ill son who died in the train would have got from the Railway authority, GRP and RPF is well imagined by us, when a passenger is travelling with valid ticket. It is the primary duty of railway authority to protect the life and liberty of passenger for which the railway is being paid in shape of price of ticket. Since the complainant’s son has paid the price of ticket and was a valid passenger he is a consumer within the meaning of Sec.2(6) of C.P. Act, 2019 and for failure to provide service to save the life by railway authorities, specifically RPF deployed in the train amounts to deficiency in service as defined U/s.2(II) of C.P. Act, 2019.
The complainant has not elaborately described the incident, engagement, death in the train but we have taken pain to go through the case diary and other annexures enclosed in the consumer complaint from which it is revealed that the son of complainant and one Kalandi Tudu the collegue of complainant’s son had taken training at Bhubaneswar and 6 persons went to Tirupati and joined at Govinde Hotel, Tirupati. As the health condition of the deceased was not good, complainant’s son boarded train No.12864 (Yasvanthpur – Howrach) on 25.9.2022 at 16.00 hrs. vide ticket No.73044336 along with Kalandi Tudu in berth No.34 of Coach No.S-7 and slept and fell ill during 20.00 hrs. to 21.00 hrs. and deceased son of complainant fell in the state of unconsciousness. The friend of complainant’s son Kalandi Tudu informed the parent about the health condition of their son Suryakanta and also about the death at 23.45 hrs. Sri Kalandi Tudu collogue has also informed the same to DMO, GRP & RPF officials about the illness and when medial officer examined the son of complainant who fell in the state of unconsciousness, confirmed about the death.
We therefore held that not providing any service during journey when the friend of complainant’s son intimated to the railway authority as reveals from the Case Diary of Police the opposite party being the head of Vijayawada Division is vicariously liable for his staff and for failure to provide service at proper time as a result of which complainant’s son died, we award Rs.3,00,000/- (three lakhs) as compensation for the deceased parent and we also award cost of Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh) towards mental agony and Rs.20,000/- (twenty thousand) towards cost of litigation. With the aforesaid observation and direction the consumer complaint is disposed of.
Pronounced in the open Commission on this 28th Nov.,2024.
