IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANNUR Present: Sri.K.Gopalan: President Smt.K.P.Preethakumari: Member Smt.M.D.Jessy: Member Dated this, the 18th day of November 2009 CC.No.86/2008 P.P.Najeeb, Kadeeja Cottage, P.O.Thikkodi, Kozhikode Dist. Complainant 1. Divisional Railway Manger, Southern Railway, Palakkad Division, Palakkad. 2. Kannur Railway Station Manger, Opposite Parties Kannur. 3. Senior Divisional Commercial Manger, Salem, Tamilnadu. O R D E R Smt.K.P.Preethakumari, Member This is a complaint filed under section12 of consumer protection act for an order directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.75000/- as compensation. The complainant’s case is that he had reserved a sleeper class ticket from Coimbatore Junction to Villupuram by the train No.ML.02 CBEMLMR Exp. With ticket No.55496110 at Mahe on 21.1.08 and the same was booked prior to one week of the journey for attending official conference at National Informatics centre, State Unit Pondicherry. But when complainant approached the Coimbatore Railway station for the journey on 21.1.08, it is understood that the 1st opposite party and his officials has been without any reason cancelled the Train without any previous notice to the passengers including the complainant. Due to cancellation of the above said train the complainant could not attend the above said conference in time, which resulted in tarnishing the dignity, before the higher officers of the complainant. Since the complainant is suffering from back pain the complainant opted journey from Coimbatoe to Villuypuram, but due to cancellation of the above train the complainant has suffered a lot for getting a bus ticket, since all the bus tickets were reserved much earlier. At last complainant got a back seat ticket by giving double charge and the complainant cannot explain in words the difficulties suffered by him in an ordinary b us and for an overnight journey and had spent a huge amount to arrive at Villupuram from Coimbatore. So the complainant suffered so much of mental agony and financial loss. So the complainant sent a registered lawyer notice to the 1t opposite party on 21.2.08 claiming compensation. But they neither sent reply nor paid any amount. Hence this complaint. On receiving notice from the Forum, both the opposite parties appeared and filed version. Later on 3rd opposite party was imp leaded and also appeared and filed version through Adv.K.Vinodraj. Opposite parties 1 to 3 admitted that the complainant reserved a sleeper class ticket to travel from Coimbatore junction to Villupuram Junction by Train No.ML.02 Coimbature. Melmaruvattur Express with ticket No.55496140 and the train was cancelled, and the complainant issued a registered lawyer notice to 1st opposite party and opposite party received etc. But they denied the other contention that due to cancellation of the above said train, the complainant had suffered so much of physical and mental agony and financial loss etc. They further denied the contentions of the complainant that all these were caused due to the deficiency service of opposite parties. The opposite parties 1 and 2 contended hat the cause of action for this case took place in the administrative jurisdiction of Salem, division. So the incident is no way connected with 2nd opposite party, 2nd opposite party may be exonerated from the liability. 3rd opposite party further submits that there is no deficiency in service on their part. The ticket was purchased from Mahe station. The act that the service of the above train as from the period 15.12.07 to 20.1.08. The in data base control switch update resulted in the issue of ticket for the train on 21.1.08 which was neither willful nor deliberate and the ticket was generated only due to the defect in the system. Since there was an error in the system the amount was refunded to the complainant without deducting the clerkage and cancellation charges. The ticket was produced at Pondicherry Railway station at 8.45 hrs. on 22.1.08 and cancelled amount of Rs.182/- was refunded to the complainant. The complainant did not suffer any difficulty mental agony or monitory loss as stated in the complaint and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Upon the above pleadings the following issues have been raised for consideration. 1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of the opposite aprties? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief? 3. Relief and cost. The evidence in this case consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.A1 to A4. Issue Nos.1 to 3 As admitted by opposite parties they had issued a ticket i.e. A1 for travelling from Coimbatore Junction to Villipuram junction on 22.1.08. They further admitted that the above train was from 15.12.07 to 20.1.08 and the ticket was issued mistakenly due to failure in database control switch update. So admission of opposite parties and the documents produced proves the complainant’s case. The issuance of ticket mistakenly, even if it is due to failure in database control system, is of deficiency service of the opposite party No.1 and 3. It is seen that 2nd opposite party in no way connected with the incident and hence 2nd opposite party is exonerated from liability. The complainant contended that due to cancellation of the train he had suffered so much of mental and physical strain to reach at Pondicherry for attending conference, since he is a man suffering from severe back pain. But he has not produced any documents to show that he is suffering from back pain. Whatever it may be it is true that, if an incident as stated in the complaint was happened it will cause so much of mental and physical strain even to a healthy man. So for these sufferings the opposite parties 1 and 3 has to compensate the complainant. We assess Rs.1000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as cost of this proceedings and the complainant is entitled to receive the same and order passed accordingly. In the result, the complaint is allowed directing opposite parties 1 and 3 to give Rs.1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as compensation and Rs.500/-(Rupees Five hundred only) as cost of this proceedings to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. Otherwise the complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of consumer protection Act. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the complainant A1.Ticket issued by OP A2 .Copy of the lawyer notice sent to OP A3 & 4.Postal receipt and AD card. Exhibits for the opposite parties: Nil Witness examined for the complainant PW1.Complainant. Witness examined for the opposite party: Nil /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur. | 
