30.09.2015

JAGANNATH BAG, MEMBER

          The present appeal is directed against the Order dated 26.6.14 of the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata, Unit-II in CC No. 252 of 2013 , whereby the complaint was allowed against OP No. 2 with cost and compensation  and dismissed against the OP No.1.

          The Complainant’s case , in brief, was as follows.

          The Complainant purchased 6 tickets for reservation in Sleeper Class  for 6 heads of his family for journey by Train No.05421UP (Digha –APDT Special)  from Howrah to Siliguri Junction on 22.10.12. The tickets were booked in Coach No. 7, confirmed berth Nos. being 64 , 56 , 40 , 59 , 62 and 32. On the date of journey, the Complainant having reached the platform with other members of his family did not find the Coach No. 7. He was asked by the Coach Attendant to enter into an AC Coach . Having entered into the AC coach , the Complainant did not find any berth reserved in their names . The TTE offered to allot berths with extra fare of Rs. 2052/- which the Complainant had to pay unwillingly. On the ground of negligence and deficiency in service of the Railway authority, he filed a consumer complaint before the Ld. Forum below.

          The Complaint was contested by the OPs who in their W.V. submitted that on the date of journey i.e., 22.10.12 Coach Nos. 6 and 7 were not attached due to some technical snags . As a result the reservation made for the said coaches consisting the names and allotted berths of the Complainant were dropped as per existing system. It was the Complainant who approached the on- duty Conductor / checking staff, and six berths were arranged in the extra 3-AC coach upon realization of difference of fare amounting to Rs. 2051/- . There was no misbehavior with the Complainant and there was nothing illegal in demanding the difference of fares of Sleeper Class and AC Class. Alternative accommodation was made by the TTE by issuing EFT and there was no question of exerting any pressure upon the Complainant. The allegation of the Complainant was unsustainable as he had undertaken his journey . The complaint was liable to be dismissed.

         Ld. Forum below having considered the materials on record and the entire W.V. of the OP observed that there was an unfair trade practice, deficiency and negligence on the part of the Railway authority and accordingly allowed the complaint against OP No.2 with cost of Rs. 2,000/-. OP No. 2 was also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the Complainant for causing harassment, mental pain and agony and loss of money for his journey even after holding confirmed Sleeper Class tickets. OP No. 2 was also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as punitive damages .

          Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the order of the Ld. Forum below, the OP No.2 filed the present appeal with prayer for direction to set aside the impugned order.

       The memorandum of appeal has been filed together with copies of the Impugned order, the petition of complaint, the  electronic reservation slip showing the status of confirmed tickets , the W.V. filed by the OP No.2 before the Ld. Forum below and the W.O filed on behalf of the Respondent No.1 among other documents .

       Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant submitted that under unavoidable circumstances the Coach Nos. 6 and 7 were not attached with the train as there were some technical snags which was announced through the Railways PA system. As no Sleeper Coach could be attached  considering the safety aspects of the passengers on board , an extra A/C coach was attached and the Complainant/Respondent was accommodated in the said coach with extra fare for reservation in the AC coach. As per rule 306 of the Coaching Tariff No. 26 Part-1 (Volume-1) Railway Administration does not guarantee reserved accommodation whether seat , berths , compartments , coaches of carriages by any particular train and will not admit any claim for compensation for inconvenience, loss of extra expenses due to such accommodation not being provided or attached to trains.  Ld. Forum’s order was arbitrary in nature and deserves to be set aside as there was no intentional negligence on the part of the Appellant/OP.

          The Respondent in person appeared and argued that there were serious lapses on the part of the OPs in so far as the particular coach in which  their berths were kept reserved was not attached causing serious mental and physical harassment of the passengers including themselves. Even the reservation chart was not put up showing their names as reserved passengers against confirmed tickets. The OPs can not disowned their responsibility in making alternative arrangement without any demand of extra fare. Ld. Forum below adjudicated the matter in judicious manner and with proper reasoning. The order be upheld.

                             Decision with Reasons:

          The point for consideration is whether the impugned order suffers from material irregularity or jurisdictional error.

          There is no dispute that the Respondent/Complainant had with him confirmed reservation tickets when he reached the platform on the date of journey but the Coach (No. 7) in which their berths were allotted was not attached with the train causing serious mental agony and physical harassment. As there was no proper guidance for them how to overcome the awkward situation. The absence of reservation chart as alleged by the Respondent / Complainant shows that non-attachment of Coach No. 7 was within the knowledge of the concerned Railway personnel well before the departure of the train and the plea of sudden technical snag as submitted by the OPs does not appear to be believable. It was incumbent upon the Appellant / OP to inform the inconvenience  to the reserved passengers well ahead and at the same time it was their duty to arrange alternative accommodation without charging any extra money. The failure to avail the reserved accommodation was not a fault of the  passengers , but a fault on the part of the Railways authority.

          Ld. Forum below took into consideration all relevant facts and evidence and rightly concluded that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Railway authority/OP. The cost and compensation as awarded by the Ld. Forum below appeared to be justified .

          We are inclined to hold that the Appellant has failed to substantiate their stand . Accordingly, the appeal does not succeed. However, considering the entire award as granted by the Ld. Forum below , the payment of punitive damages may be struck off. Hence,

                                      Ordered

That the appeal be and the same is allowed in part with modification of the impugned order to the effect that the cost and compensation of (Rs. 2000/- + Rs. 20,000/- = ) Rs. 22,000/- shall be paid by the Appellant/ OP to the Complainant within 40 days from the date of this order, failing which interest @ 9% p.a. on such amount shall be payable till full realization and compensation being awarded, payment of punitive damages as ordered by the Ld. Forum below is dispensed with. No separate order as to costs.