Delhi

East Delhi

CC/181/2015

MANISH - Complainant(s)

Versus

CHIEF RESERVATION SUPERVISOR - Opp.Party(s)

24 Aug 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO. 181/15

 

Mr. MANISH JAIN

S/O Shri RAVINDER KUMAR JAIN

R/O 125, RISHABH VIHAR,

1. •  

 

Vs

 

 

1. CHIEF RESERVATION SUPERVISOR/PRINCIPAL OFFICER

RAILWAY RESERVATION CENTER,

NEAR KARKARDOOMA COURTS,

1.  

 

2. NORTHERN RAILWAY,

BARODA HOUSE, NEW DELHI.

 

                                                                                                                         ….Opponents

 

Date of Institution: 17.03.2015

Judgment Reserved for: 12.11.2018

Judgment Passed on: 20.11.2018

CORUM:

Sh. SUKHDEV SINGH                  (PRESIDENT)

Dr. P.N. TIWARI                            (MEMBER)

Ms. HARPREET KAUR CHARYA (MEMBER)

 

ORDER BY: MS. HARPREET KAUR CHARYA (MEMBER)

JUDGEMENT

1. Jurisdiction of this forum has been invoked by the complainant, Shri Manish Jain against Chief Reservation Supervisor/Principal Officer (OP-1), and Northern Railway, Baroda House (OP-2), with allegations of deficiency in services and unfair trade practice.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that the complainant is a businessman, who started his journey from Gaya to New Delhi on 23.03.2014 vide train no. 02815 with PNR no. 6625029960. It has been stated that though the fare was charged equivalent to that of  Rajdhani ,but the condition of the train was worse, as there was no cleanliness, toilet seats were broken and electrical switches were broken ,posing danger to the safety of passengers and beddings and blankets were in torn condition. It has been stated that the train used to stop every now and then, without station and was being driven in rash manner. There was no provision of pantry car and drinking water and the said train was late by 10 hours from its schedule. A written complaint was lodged by the complainant alongwith co-passengers regarding the condition of the train and delay. It has been further stated that on the complaints lodged with Railway Board no action had been taken, thus feeling aggrieved the complainant has alleged the act of the respondents to be mischievous, wrongful & negligent which amounts to harassment. Hence, the present complaint seeking Rs.50,000/- as damages/compensation alongwith interest @24% p.a. and litigation expenses.

 

The copy of the complaint lodged in the complaint book with Guard/ Conductor Guard/ Coach attendant, Photographs of the train have been annexed with the complaint.

 

3. Written Statement was filed on behalf of OP-1 and OP-2 upon service of the notice in the present complaint, where they have taken several objections in their defence such as: the complainant was not a consumer; complaint was bad for misjoinder of parties as there were no specific cause of action against OP-2. It was submitted that safety of the passengers was the primary concern of the Railway Administration and the reason of delay may be due to operational safety  . It was further submitted that the given PNR no. 6625029960 did not match and the complainant had merely put his signature as the witness in the complaint book. Rest all the contents of the complaint have been denied.

 

4. Rejoinder to the written statement of OP-1 and OP-2 was filed, where the contents of the complaint have been reiterated. They have denied the submissions of the OPs. The Complainant has also annexed reply of OP dated 18.07.2014 to the RTI application of date 11.06.2014 and print out of train monitoring.

 

5. Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by the complainant where he got examined himself and has reiterated the contents of the complaint and has got exhibited the complaint book available in the train as Ex. CW 1/1, photograph as Ex. CW 1/2, Reply to the RTI application as Ex. CW1/3.

OP got examined Shri. Praveen Kumar Jain , Deputy CCM/UTS Northern Railway, who has also deposed on oath the contents of their Written Statement.

 

6. We have heard the submissions on behalf of Ld. Counsel for OP and have perused the material placed on record as the complainant has stopped appearing. If we look at the allegations made by the complainant against the OP ,it is seen that the complaint has been written by  one ,Shri Ashutosh Kumar, (who is not a party to this complaint) in the complaint book maintained with the Coach/Guard which is Ex. CW 1/1. He has alleged that the train was late and the beddings were torn as well as toilet seats were broken. However, the OP has stated that the PNR given in the complaint and details given by the complainant did not match and at the same time the complainant has not placed any document such as, Ticket on record to support his claim . Neither he has got examined Shri Ashutosh Kumar,to substantiate his allegations As the complainant has failed to prove his case, the same is dismissed being devoid of merit without orders to cost.

Copy of this order be sent to both the parties as per law.

 

 

(Dr. P.N. TIWARI)                                                                    (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)              

      MEMBER                                                                                            MEMBER

 

 

                                                (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                                                PRESIDENT