The fact of the case as revealed from the petition of complaint as well as from the evidence is that the complainant along with his family members boarded at Farakka Express bearing Train No. 13484 of 19/06/2017 at Varanasi Railway Junction in Coach No. A1.

After boarding and placing the luggage the complainant felt uneasy and their afterward he realized that A.C. of the same coach was not working. After realizing such fact the complainant brought the notice to the coach attendant and the Electrical Stuff. Their after inspire of several requests made by the complainant no step was taken by the O.P. to rectify the technical fault for running A.C..

It has been further stated that at Moghal Sarai Railway Junction to T.T.E i.e. Train Ticket Examiner boarded the train inspire of request of the complainant the T.T Es did not take any step. The complainant and the other co-passengers requested the T.T.E to give the complaint book but the T.T.E refused to give complaint book to the complainant. But as a responsible citizens the complainant did not pull the chain. At Danapur Railway Station new T.T.Es. boarded in the train and they boarded the train he told his name Sri Pramod Kumar and he  is CST/MLDT Mr. Kumar reluctantly gave the complainant the complaint book the reading lamps of the coach was not working despite of several request non turn of up to remove the intolerable suffering of the passengers.

 When the train reached the Malda Town Railway Station the Station Manager of Malda Station refused to listen the complaint or accept any complaint. The cause of action  for the present case arose on 19/06/2017 within the judicial of this Forum as a ticket was Varanasi to Malda Town Station the complainant has prayed for returned for money amount of Rs.2670/- and compensation of Rs.6000/- and litigation cause.

The petition has been contested by the O.Ps  contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable, the case is bad for the  cause of action and this Forum has come to trying the case. The definite difference case is that the train was running late and due to stopping for a considerable time the batteries of the A.C become low capacity for which the cooling function of the A.C. was not functioning properly for some time but after recharge of the battery of the A.C. Coach starting cooling of the said coach.

When the train reaches the Patna Railway Junction Station the mechanic immediately come to the compartment and found that the A.C. was not out of order and the capacity of the battery became low as the train stopped several times

 Considering such fact and circumstances the instance case is liable to be rejected.

In order to prove the case the complainant was himself examined as PW-1 and cross-examined. No other witness was examined on behalf of the complainant. On the other hand no witness was examined on behalf of the O.P.

Now the point for determination:-  Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief or not ?

                             ::DECISION WITH REASONS::

Ld.Lawyer of the complainant argued that the complainant booked one railway ticket of Malda Farakka Express  from Varanasi to Malda in Coach No. A1. But after boarding the coach the complainant realized that the A.C. machine was not functioning. The complainant several times requested the TTs on duty but ultimately there was no fruitful result. This is why the complainant has filed the case for compensation and refund of the amount of the railway ticket.

On the other hand the Ld.Lawyer of the O.P. Railway has argued that the present case is not maintainable before this Forum and he further argued that at the time of journey by the complainant the A.C. machine was not out of order as such the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

The Ld.Lawyer of the O.P. in order to substantiate his first argument submitted that this Forum has got no jurisdiction to try the case as the alleged incidence took place beyond the jurisdiction of this Forum.  In this regard the Ld.Lawyer of the O.P. refers a case law of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1560 of 2004 ( Sonix Surgical Vs. National Insurance Co.) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the case is to be filed where  cause of action arose. Mere having branch office at Malda this Forum will have no jurisdiction though the Railway Authorities has the office at Malda.  In view of the case law the instant case is not maintainable. The complainant boarded the train at Varanasi. The Ld.Lawyer of the complainant argued that the ticket was purchased from Malda.  The complainant did not file any application to know that before the Authority that the ticket was purchased through online from Malda. It is a fact that the database of the railway booking tickets is lying with the Railway Authority but the complainant should have prayed through RTI application from Railway to show that the ticket was purchased through online from Malda but nothing was done on behalf of the complainant. So considering the fact and on the above case law of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India this Forum has got no jurisdiction to try the case.

Next point is to be considered whether actually the complainant has been able to prove the fact that the A.C. machine was out of order. In this case the complainant did not adduce any evidence of any other person to show that other co-passengers were also suffered. From the cross-examination of P.W.-1 it is found that he lodged the complaint through online immediately and one co-passenger Aman Kr. Shah also lodged complaint. But he categorically stated that in cross-examination he will not examine Aman Kr. Shah. Moreover, on the basis of the report submitted by the Railway Authority that the A.C. Machine was not out of order. According to the argument as advanced by the Ld.Lawyer of the O.P. is that the train was detained over half an hour at Varanasi outer railway station as such the cooling inside the A.C. coaches was less. From the report it is found that that from Varanasi to Patna the cooling was fully satisfactory. In the W/V the O.P. has stated that due to the detention of the train at the outer station at Varanasi Railway Station the capacity of the battery became low as such the frequency of the A.C. became lower and such fact has been submitted by the P.W.-1 in his cross-examination that the train in question reached the Varanasi Station more than half an hour so the fact as mentioned in W.V. tallies with the fact from the cross-examination of P.W.-1. So on considering the facts and circumstances it is found that there was no latches on the part of the Railway Authority.

So on considering the facts and circumstances of the case the instant case is liable to be dismissed as the complainant did not pay the dues and did not come to this Forum with a clean hand.

C.F. paid is correct.

Hence, ordered that

 the case be and the same is dismissed on contest without any   cost.

Let a copy of this judgment be given to the Complainant/O.P. free of cost on proper application.