Complaint presented on 22.11.2013

                                                                Order pronounced on  :  29.03.2016

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,         :      PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,            :     MEMBER II

TUESDAY THE 29th DAY OF MARCH 2016

C.C.NO.225/2013

1.Mr,Thendral Kumar B.E.,

2. Asst.Pro(Mrs) Saranya Thendral Kumar B.Tech

Both are residing at

No.57, Kumaran Nagar (SEVVAPET ROAD)

Thirur & Post,

Thiruvallur TK and DT- 602 025.

                                                                                           ..... Complainants

..Vs..

Date of complaint                                  : 28.11.2013

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/S. T.Arun Kumar

Counsel for Opposite parties                  : M/S. K.Kumaran

O R D E R

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.SC., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

       The Complainants reserved E-tickets in I-class AC and travelled in train number 16178 from Trichy to Chennai, Egmore on 06.09.2013.  The train reached Chennai, Egmore at 5.30a.m. As they have to catch a train at Central Sub-Urban Station to go to Sevvapet Railway Station and the 1^st Complainant’s father was waiting for them with two first class ticket at Chennai Central Sub-Urban Station, due to urgency they inadvertently assumed that they had valid ticket from Trichy to Sevvapet and stepped into the local train to reach Chennai Central. At Chennai Park a train ticket examiner asked the Complainants to show their ticket and they explained the reason that they were unable to take the tickets and further they were newly married couple and they are prepared to pay the fine.  However the TTE made them to wait more than an hour at Park Station and later he issued a receipt for Rs.4444/- towards excess fair as if they had travelled without tickets. Further the TTE insulted the Complainants and treated them very badly. After paying the receipt amount they have verified with the station master at Chennai Central Station and he informed to him that the fine amount was only Rs.260/- for ticketless travelling in EMU from Tambaram to Beach. Further they learnt from the station master that the fine amount was collected as if they have travelled without ID proof. However, the 2nd Complainant driving license was shown as ID at Trichy when they boarded the train.  The act of TTE collecting fine at Park Station is illegal and caused mental agony to the Complainant. The 1^st Complainant wrote Complaint to the Railway Authorities including Vigilance Officer. The Complainants travelled with valid tickets and ID proof and therefore collecting fine from them establishes that the Opposite Parties committed Deficiency in Service. Hence this Complaint.

2.WRITTEN VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES IN BRIEF

          The Complaints made against the Senior Ticket Examiner are false and not correct and in this regard it is submitted that the action taken by the Senior Ticket Examiner will not amount to Deficiency in Service, since he had acted as per the rules and had discharged his official duty as Ticket Examiner within the rules and therefore, the above dispute will not come under the purview of the Consumer Forum. As per the records, E-Ticket purchased by the Complainants was not confirmed under the Emergency quota,   but on normal channel only and not otherwise as stated by the complainants. The passengers travelling with E-ticket, instructions have been given to carry the printout of the ticket/VRM along with any of the listed identity card in original. Both the ticket and the ID card will be examined by the ticket checking staff on stations/trains for verification purpose. Therefore it is the duty of the passengers to comply with this verification till they leave the ticketing area of the railway premises. Since the Complainants had failed to produce the original ID when requested for by the TTE concerned, he was imposed with fine and the Complainants have paid the fare and excess fare levied of Rs.4,444/- without any  protest under acknowledgement in the Excess Fare Ticket as a token of his acceptance for the same. The reason for the fine and its details were explained by the TTE to the Complainants at the time of levying the fine and the receipt issued to the Complainants also bears the reason for the said collection of fine. No action has been taken on his Complaint dated 17.09.2013, since a reply was sent to him by the Opposite Parties vide letter No.C.569/XI/46/2013-14 dated 07.10.2013.Hence the Opposite Parties prays to dismiss the Complaint with cost.

3.POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether this Forum has Jurisdiction to entertain this Complaint?

          2. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          3. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

4.POINT:1

          The admitted facts are that the Complainants booked e-ticket  Ex.A1  which is in wait list and later tickets were confirmed which is evidenced in Ex.A2 and they  travelled I-class AC in train No.16178, Rockfort Express from Trichy to Chennai, Egmore on 06.09.2013 and they reached Egmore on 07.09.2013 at about 5.30.a.m and the TTE of the Opposite Parties after enquiry with the Complainants  requiring them to pay a fine of Rs.4444/- by issuing Ex.A3 receipt to them and they have also paid the same. 

5. The Opposite Parties counsel specifically contended that the Complaint is not maintainable and the Complainants have to approach only Railway Claims Tribunal in respect of refund of the fares by virtue of section 13 (1) (b) of The Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and hence this forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. The case in hand is not for refund of  fare. The Complainant’s wanted refund of amount which was collected by the TTE as fine. Therefore the contention of the counsel cannot be accepted. Further section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act Provides for an additional remedy not in derogation of any other law. Therefore by virtue of the section 3 of the Act and the complaint filed for refund of fine this Complaint is maintainable in this Forum.

6. POINT:2

          According to the Complainant’s after they alighted at Egmore,  Chennai to catch  a  Sub-Urban train at Chennai Central to go to Sevvapet, as if they are under the  impression that they are having ticket upto Sevvapet, they boarded Sub-Urban train and alighted at Park Station, a TTE verified and detained  them  for more than an hour and thereafter issued Ex.A3 receipt to pay a fine of Rs. 4444/-  and though they protested that they had valid ticket, the TTE compelled them to pay the amount and they have also paid and thereafter left for Sevvapet and collecting such a huge amount is illegal and unjust.

          7. The Opposite Parties replied that the Complaint is not at all maintainable before this Forum  and they should have approached only the Railway Tribunal in respect of the tickets amount and further while the TTE checking the passengers in train no.16178  and   on demand the Complainants failed  to produce the ID proof as per rules to the TTE and hence failure to produce  the ID proof is treated as  ticketless travel and therefore the  amount collected by the TTE  is an accordance with rules and therefore prays to dismiss the Complaint.

          8. Ex.A1 E-ticket contains the conditions that the passengers should carry any one of the ID mentioned therein for checking on stations/trains for verification purpose. Normally at the starting point of the train or whenever the passengers entered in the reserved coach for journey the TTE will verify the passenger chart about the name of the passengers, PNR ticket number with that of the list and after verification of the ID, they will also enter in the chart the category of the ID verified by the TTE. The definite case of the Complainants are that when they started the journey at Trichy, the TTE in the train verified the driving license of the 2^nd Complainant and permitted them to travel. In that case if the TTE on demanded the original ID at station certainly she could have produced the same. The TTE stated in Ex.B1 that the Complainants produced e-ticket and failed to produce the identity card either for the 1^st Complainant or his wife.  Both the Complainants are Engineering graduates and certainly they could have carried any one of the ID and it is very difficult to accept that the Complainant failed to produce the ID to the TTE on demand. The Complainants were permitted by the coach TTE   to travel from Trichy to Egmore.  Having travelled from Trichy to Egmore through the Opposite Party train, it is for the Opposite Party to prove that they have travelled without ID. Further if the passenger chart of  the said train had been  produced, it could prove  that whether the 2^nd Complainant had  produced her driving license as ID at Trichy to commence their journey. The said chart is in the custody of the Opposite Parties and they have not conveniently produced the same.

          9. It is the specific case of the Complainant that he was caught by the TTE at Chennai Park Station. This fact was not denied by the Opposite Party in his written version and also not pleaded that the TTE caught him at Egmore Station. Since the Opposite Party has not denied the version of the Complainants, that they have been held by the TTE at Park Station is accepted and the TTE also collected the amount of Rs.4,444/- from the Complainants only at the Park Station and not at any other station.  The counsel for the Opposite Party shown a commercial circular No.56/2008 dated 08.10.2008 and contended that as per the circular if the passenger has not carried ID, the passenger will be treated as travelling without ticket and in the case in hand also the Complainants have not produced the ID and hence the TTE rightly imposed fine on them and also collected the same. The Complainants were caught only at Park Station and imposed fine only at Park. This fact was suppressed by the Opposite Party to their convenience. Further in the fine receipt the Park Station was not mentioned where the Complainants  had been fined. Therefore the Opposite Party has not defended the case in clean hands. The Complainants themselves admits that they did not have tickets from Egmore to Park Station. In that case the TTE ought to have fined them only for Egmore to Park Station for travelling without tickets in the Sub-urban train. On the other hand the case of the Opposite Party that the TTE fined them as if the Complainants have not shown the ID on demand is not at all acceptable .Therefore it is held that the Complainant travelled throughout with proper ID and they have not shown ID to the TTE  is not at all acceptable. In view of the forgoing discussion it is held that the Opposite Parties have committed Deficiency in Service due to the act of their TTE.

10. POINT:3

          Since the Opposite Parties held that they have committed Deficiency in Service, the contention of the Complainants that they have suffered with mental agony is acceptable.  As the Complainants have travelled with valid tickets after producing valid ID at the starting point of the train, the request of the Complainant that they are entitled for refund of the amount paid in Ex.A3 receipt is accepted and apart from that they are also entitled for compensation for mental agony with litigation expenses.

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties 1 & 2 jointly or severally ordered to refund the amount of Rs.4,444/- (Rupees four thousand four hundred and forty four only) to the Complainant  and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) towards compensation, apart from that a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses. The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of payment.   

Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 29^th   day of March 2016.

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 01.09.2013                   Reservation E-mail

Ex.A2 dated 06.09.2013                   1^st Ac Reservation Ticket

Ex.A3 dated 07.09.2013                   Excess Fare Receipt

Ex.A4 dated 07.09.2013         First Class Train Ticket from Central to Sevvapet

Ex.A5 dated 17.09.2013                   Copy of notice

Ex.A6 dated 26.09.2013                   Copy of notice

Ex.A7 dated 18.09.2013                   Acknowledgement Card

Ex.A8 dated 27.09.2013                   Acknowledgement Card

Ex.A9 dated 05.05.2009                   Driving license copy

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:

Ex.B1 dated NIL                     Excess Fare Ticket

Ex.B2 dated 07.10.2013                   Southern Railway

MEMBER – II                                                                       PRESIDENT