MUMBAI: A lawyer who encountered rats and filth in the compartment of a Mumbai Ernakulam Duranto train in 2015 has been awarded Rs 19,000 compensation by the consumer forum.

Holding the Central Railway guilty of deficiency of service, the forum said that as the passengers had paid a premium amount, premium service should have been provided.

Advocate Sheetal Kanakia and her relative Hema Kanakia submitted a complaint before the South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on December 2, 2015.

They said that they boarded the train from LTT on November 7, 2015, and returned on November 15, 2015. On the train, when Sheetal and Hema found rats and complained, they were told that rodents were a normal thing and that the staff gets only three hours to clean such a big train . Sheetal and Hema stated that they submitted a written complaint to the ticketchecker mentioning the rats, unhealthy food, unclean water supply and dirt on the train. But they got no response to the complaint or the calls made to the authorities.

They alleged that due to the unhealthy food served, their health got affected and it affected their holiday. They sought a refund of the Rs 6,600 paid for the tickets along with a compensation for mental agony and harassment suffered. The women submitted copies of their tickets, a complaint copy and medical treatment taken through the family doctor in Mumbai.

The railways denied the allegations and said that fumigation was done on a timely basis. They denied all other allegations of unclean toilets and lack of water supply. The forum, however, pointed out that the railways had not brought any cogent and convincing evidence on record to rebut the allegations made by the complainants. “At one side, opposite party (railways) stated that the train was properly cleaned as per schedule, all plates and utensils were properly cleaned, food was proper. In this respect they would have submitted the records but they failed to do so,” the forum held.

The forum held that the complaints submitted to the officer in-charge on the train on the onward and return journey were acknowledged by the officer present. “Thus complainants have brought circumstantial evidence regarding deficiency in services committed by the opposite party on record. It is pertinent to know that the complainants had purchased premium type of tickets for travelling through railway, then it was binding on opposite party to provide premium type of services to the complainants,” the forum observed.

