th July 2009nd year intermediate. After Sankranti vacation the complainant C.C. No. 65 of 2009 C.C. No. 65 of 20094 6. On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A7 were marked. 7. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination. i. Whether the complainant is entitled to receive the amount which was paid towards bus fare along with costs and compensation from the respondents? ii. Whether there is any negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the respondents? iii. To what relief? 8. Point Nos. 1 & 2 Heard both sides and perused the records available with the forum and forum made the following order. The complainant and her friend both were studying in Narayana Junior College, Hyderabad. The complainant is preparing for EAMCET coaching (medicine) and her friend by name Akila is studying 2 after completion of Sankranti holidays. The father of Akila booked tickets to the complainant and her friend from R3, who is the agent of R1 & R2. Ex. A1 is the ticket which was booked by her friend father. They booked the tickets on 10-1-2009. On the date of journey i.e. 17-1-2009 at 8.00 p.m. the complainant and her friend Akila and Akila’s father accompanied them to Rayachoty bus stand and they boarded in the same service 5651 and they took general ticket from Rayachoty to Kadapa. Ex. A2 is the general ticket which was taken by them. After reaching Kadapa the father of Akila requested the driver to provide seat Nos. 3 & 4 to the complainant and her friend. But the driver of the said bus recklessly answered that the seats were already reserved at R2’s depot. The complainant and her friend Akila along with her father met with the R1 and requested them to make any alternative arrangement but they failed to do so. It is a peak season i.e. after Sankranti heavy rush in all the buses they could not get any seat in any bus. The R1 informed that in case of cancellation of tickets 20% of the ticket value will be refunded. The complainant stated that in helpless condition, she and her friend were forced to stay in Kadapa bus stand as it C.C. No. 65 of 2009nd year intermediate in the same college. Both the girls wants to go to Hyderabad5 is mid night and they could not return to Rayachoty due to non availability of bus service in the mid night. The complainant and her friend went to Hyderabad after lapse of four days due to non availablity of reservation, as the complainant is taking coaching for medicine each day is valuable for her, and due to negligent act of the respondents she lost valuable classes for three days. Not only that she and her friend were forced to stay at Kadapa bus stand, due to non availability of any reservation in any bus. After returning home the complainant’s friend Akila’s father issued a legal notice to all the respondents calling upon them to take suitable action against their employees, who are responsible for loss caused to her. The R1 & R2 gave formal reply and R3 returned the postal cover with false endorsement. Ex. A3 is the legal notice issued by complainant’s friend father. Ex. A4 is the reply notice issued by R2. Ex. A5 is the reply notice issued by R1. Ex. A6 is the returned postal cover issued to R3 and Ex. A7 is the Xerox copy of tuition fee, which was paid by the complainant. 9. The respondents in their counter stated that the complainant has reserved the seat from ATB agent APSRTC old bus stand Kadapa in the bus No. 5651 operating on route Chittoor – Hyderabad to make journey on 17-1-2009 from Kadapa to Hydeabad by paying ticket Rs. 244/-. Due to software problem the allotment of the seat was not reached to the service station and the same seats were booked in chittoor. After getting information from online agents the Kadapa depot authorities have made alternative arrangements by providing another bus at the same time from Kadapa to Hyderabad and requested the complainant and her friend to board the bus but they refused to board the bus, the reasons best known them. The respondents stated that they have made alternative arrangements and there is no deficiency of service caused to the complainant by APSRTC authorities. The RTC counsel stated that they made announcement in mike that they made alternative arrangement and passengers are requested to board the bus. But the complainant and her friend did C.C. No. 65 of 20096 not boarded the bus, so there is no deficiency of service on the part of the respondents. Even now they are ready to refund the ticket amount which was not traveled by the complainant and her friend. It is true that the complainant and her friend booked tickets to travel from Kadapa to Hyderabad after completion of Sankantri holidays on 10-1-2009 they have reserved their seats. Their journey date is 17-1-2009. It means they have booked their tickets 7 days prior to the journey from Kadapa – Hydeabad. As stated by the respondents that due to software problem the seats were allotted in Chittoor depot only and the same was not brought to the notice of the agent and after getting information they made alternative arrangement by providing a bus. It is not mentioned that how many passengers were detained like the complainant and her friend simply they have stated that they have made alternative arrangement by providing another bus. What was the bus No. they have provided there is no proof the same how many passengers were detained and how many passengers traveled in the alternative service provided by the respondents. There is no data from the respondents. Simply stating that they have provided another bus. If at all really they have provided any alternative service at the same time. The complainant and her friend could have definitely availed the provision which was made by the respondents as they are students and it is necessary for them to go to college immediately after completion of holidays. In the mid night does anybody wants to stay in the bus stand without going to their destination, The RTC authorities have simply stated that they have made alternative services. No details of the said arrangements. The agent of APSRTC i.e. R3 is sole labial to pay compensation in the present C.C. He has not even received the notice which was issued by the Hon’ble Forum and returned the same with false endorsement. He is guilty to attend before the Hon’ble Forum, he is called absent and set exparte. The APSRTC authorities must warn agents like R3, to have smooth running of their buses. We are of the opinion that the respondents have caused much inconvenience to the complainant and her friend and they are liable to pay costs and compensation C.C. No. 65 of 20097 to the complainant. We feel there is deficiency of service on the part of the respondents. Hence, the points are answered accordingly. 10. Point No. 3 In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the respondents to refund ticket amount of Rs. 244/- (Rupees Two hundred and Forty four only), to pay Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) towards damages for loss of general classes in the college, to pay Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) towards compensation for mental agony and Rs. 500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards costs of the complaint. The respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the above amount within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the complainant is entitled interest @ 9% p.a. of the total amount. Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 6 MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE Witnesses examined. For Complainant : NIL For Respondent : NIL Exhibits marked for Complainant : - Ex. A1 Bus ticket No. 43518, dt. 10-1-2009. Ex. A2 X/c general Ticket from Rayachoty – Kadapa. Ex. A3 X/c of legal notice from R. Siva Mohan to respondents, 27-1-2009. Ex. A4 X/c of letter from R2 to R. Siva Mohan, dt. 21-9-2009. Ex. A5 X/c of letter from R1to R. Siva Mohan. Ex. A6 X/c of postal receipt and postal acknowledgement card. Ex. A7 X/c of tuition fee certificate, dt. 15-2-2009. Exhibits marked for Respondents: - MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT Copy to :- 1) Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate, 2) Sri V. Srinivas, Advocate. 3) P. Khader Khan, Authorised Agent, Masha Allah, APSRTC, Online booking centre, Opp. To NGO’s Home, Near Old Bus stand, Kadapa. 1) Copy was made ready on : 2) Copy was dispatched on : 3) Copy of delivered to parties : B.V.P. - - - C.C. No. 65 of 2009th July 2009 CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 65 / 2009 B. Divya, D/o B. Sitharamaiah, aged 17 years, Minor, Rep. by natural guardian, father B. Sitharamaiah, R/a D.No. 50/24, Kothapet, Rayachoty Mandal, Kadapa District. ….. Complainant. Vs. 1) Depot Manager, APSRTC, Kadapa Depot, Kadapa District. 2) Depot Manager, APSRTC, Chittoor Depot, Chittoor District. 3) P. Khader Khan, Authorised Agent, Masha Allah, APSRTC, Online booking centre, Opp. To NGO’s Home, Near Old Bus stand, Kadapa. ….. Respondents. This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on 3-7-2009 in the presence of Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate for complainant and Sri V. Srinivas, Advocate for R1 & R2 and R3 called absent and set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:- O R D E R (Per Smt. B. Durga Kumari, Member), 1. Complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to the respondents to refund Rs. 244/- towards cost of ticket along with interest @ 24% p.a., to pay Rs. 15,000/- towards damages for loss of general classes at her college, to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony to pay Rs. 1,000/- towards costs of the complaint. 2. The brief facts of the complaint is as follows:- The complainant was preparing for EAMCET coaching (medicine) in Narayana Junior College, Kothapet, Hyderabad, and by name R. Akhila her father’s friend daughter is also studying in the same college 2 and her friend wants to go to Hyderabad on 17-1-2009. They booked two tickets on 10-1-2009 from R3, as he is the authorized agent for issuing tickets for R1 and R2. The complainant’s friends father paid the costs of two tickets and ticket Nos.1680221/OA43517 & 16800221/OA 43518 in Super Luxury Service No. 2 5651belongs to R2 depot and seat Nos. are 3 & 4. The cost of each ticket is Rs. 244/- and the bus ply via Rayachoty, Kadapa and Kurnool to Hyderabad. On 17-1-2009 at about 8.00 p.m. the complainant along with her friends father and her friend Akila boarded the same bus i.e. service No. 5651 at Rayachoty and they took general ticket from Rayachoty to Kadapa to travel in the bus. The bus reached at Kadapa and the father of the complainant’s friend requested the bus driver to arrange seats 3 & 4 to the children. The bus driver recklessly answered that the seats were already reserved at R2 depot. The complainant and her friend along with her father met R1, for alternative arrangement but they could not arrange any alternative to the complainant and her friend and they are forced to stay at Kadapa bus stand in the mid night. 3. The R1 stated that in case of cancellation of tickets 20% of the ticket value will be refunded. The complainant and friend’s father did not accept for the same, as it was mid night they could not return back to Rayachoty and in the morning they returned to Rayachoty. Due to non availability of reservation the complainant and her friend went to Hydeabad after laps of 4 days. Further the complainant stated that she is taking coaching for medicine test and each day is valuable for her. Due to negligence on the part of the R1 & R2 she lost three days valuable classes. The complainant stated that due to negligent attitude of the respondents she and her family and her friend suffered mentally and physically. The respondents are liable to pay the damages. The complainant alleged deficiency of service on the part of the respondents. The father of the complainant’s friend got issued notice to all the respondents calling upon them to take suitable action against the employees, who are responsible for loss caused to her. The R1 & R2 gave a formal reply to the notice issued by the complainant friend’s father and requested them to obtain refund of amount. The R3 did not received the notice. The complainant stated that her father paid Rs. 15,000/- towards fee to the Junior C.C. No. 65 of 2009 DISTRICT FORUM :: KADAPA PRESENT SRI P.V. NAGESWARA RAO, M.A., LL.M., PRESIDENT SMT. B. DURGA KUMARI, B.A., B.L., MEMBER SRI S.A. KHADER BASHA, B.Sc., MEMBER. Monday, 6 3 College, due to deficiency of service of the respondent she lost valuable class for 3 days. Apart from it she suffered physical stain on 17-1-2009 as she was forced to stay at Kadapa bus stand for whole night. Hence, the complaint. 4. The counter filed by R1 and the same was adopted by R2. The respondents stated that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts of the case. The complainant is put to strict proof of all the allegations which are not expressly admitted herein. It is true that the complainant has reserved seat from ATB agent APSRTC Old bus stand, Kadapa in bus service No. 5651 operating on route Chittoor – Hyderabad 22-25 hours to make her journey on 17-1-2009 from Kadapa to Hyderabad boarding at Kadapa by paying Rs. 244/-. The respondents further stated that due to software problem the seat, was reserved at Kadapa even through the same seat was booked at Chittoor Depot. The ATB agent of the said service counter was unable to find that the same ticket was reserved at Chittoor depot. After getting the information from on line agents about problem, the Kadapa Depot authorities have made alternative arrangements duly providing a bus at the same time 22-25 hours Hyderabad service and requested the complainant to board the said bus to make her journey from Kadapa to Hyderabad without causing inconvenience. The respondents further stated that they have made alternative arrangement by providing a bus on the same time from Kadapa to Hyderabad. The complainant has not boarded the bus for the reasons best know to her. So there is no any deficiency of service caused to the complainant by APSRTC authorities. There are no bonafides in the complaint except to harass the APSRTC authorities to gain the amount. The complaint was filed with false allegations in view of the above said fact. There is no deficiency of service caused to the complainant and cause of action does not arise. Hence, the Hon’ble Forum has to dismiss the present complaint in limini. 5. The R3 was called absent and set exparte.
......................B. Durga Kumari
......................Sri P.V. Nageswara Rao
......................Sri.S.A.Khader Basha | | 
