Date of filing : 04-11-2013
Date of order : 28-11-2014
IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD
CC.254/2013
Dated this, the 28th day of November 2014
PRESENT:
SMT.P.RAMADEVI : PRESIDENT
SMT.K.G.BEENA : MEMBER
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL : MEMBER
Siji.M.B. W/o. T.V. Biju Mohan, : Complainant
“Harisree” Vengat, Cheruvathur.Po.
Kasaragod. 671313.
(In Person)
1 Duty Conductor, KSRTC, : Opposite parties
RSC 474-KL 15-9961, Dt. 26-10-2013.
2 Assistant Transport Officer,
KSRTC, Kasaragod.
3 The Managing Director, KSRTC,
Thiruvananthapuram.
(Ops 1 to 3 Adv.K.V.Prabhakaran, Kasaragod)
O R D E R
SMT.SHIBA.M.SAMUEL, MEMBER
The brief case of the complainant is that on 26-10-2013 the complainant travelled in a KSRTC bus bearing No.KL-15/9961. While boarding the bus from a place called Karivellur, her saree was torn by piercing in to a piece of tin sheet which was separated on the bottom of the door of said bus. The complainant tried to convince about the incident to the conductor and driver of the bus and even contacted the opposite parties office at Kasaragod but her grievance was not set right by them. The incident was due to the damage to the door of the opposite parties bus and it amounts to deficiency in service. Hence the complaint.
2. Opposite parties appeared and filed version. The counsel for opposite parties vehemently contested the matter and opposed all the averments in the complaint. In the version opposite parties contended that there is no deficiency in service from their side and the duty conductor and driver denied that there was no such untoward incident in their service on 26-10-2013 and there was no damage to the door of the above bus. The bus was issued to service after proper checking and maintenance, it was further contended that it was a new bus and all the repair works carried out.
3. Complainant was examined as PW1 and Exts A1 & A2 marked. The subject matter in the above case i.e, the saree was marked as MO-1. Opposite party No.1 was examined and Exts B1 to B3were marked.
4. While going through the evidence before the Forum and the documents before us, the complainant proved that she was travelled in the alleged bus. Ext.A1 is the ticket issued for her and MO-1 saree carefully perused and found that the same was torn and it cannot be used again. The saree appears to be new and as per Ext.A2 it was purchased on 22-10-2013. The bill produced by PW1 proves her contention. The version and evidence of the opposite parties are that as per Exit B1 way bill, there was no such complaint made by anybody and if at all any complaint was there, then it will have a place in the Ext.B1 and B2. The vehicle log sheet dated 25-10-2013 & 26-10-2013 which disclose about the report of any sort of defects and Ext.B2 is the occurence Register of 25-1-2013 and 26-10-13 in any of the above records such defects are mentioned. But it is pertinent to note that all these documents are in custody of opposite parties and they can create any evidence if they wanted to create for the purpose of case and there is nothing unbelievable in version of PW1 and on the basis of Exts marked on the side and MO-1 saree. Only an aggrieved person will approach a Forum for the redressal of the grievance, especially the complainant is coming from Cheruvathur to Kasaragod which is approximately 50 KMs away from the Forum. Therefore the complainant is entitled for a necessary relief. Everybody knows that the condition of KSRTC bus in our states which does not keep up the standard and timings. Some times the buses are in such a condition that it will not be safe to travel in KSRTC bus with peace of mind. In rainy season some buses are leaking, window shuters will not be openable freely and seat will be untidey and torn which results inconvenience and discomforts to the passengers. Therefore it is the duty of opposite parties to provide better service to the thousands of passengers who are daily depending upon KSRTC to reach their destination without mental agony and discomforts. Opposite party No.1 is exonerated from the liability. Since there is no specific allegation on his part.
In the result, the complaint is allowed and directing the opposite parties Nos 2 & 3 to pay an amount of Rs.3000/- being the price of the saree and Rs.2000/- as compensation for the mental agony and cost of Rs.1000/- to the above proceedings. Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of receipt of copy order.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Exts.
A1.Ticket issued by KSRTC to complainant.
A2. 22-10-2013 Cash bill issued by Bharath Silks Cheruvathur for an amount of Rs.3000/-
B1.Way Bill
B2. Log Sheet
B3. Copy of Occurence Register of 25-10-2013 & 26-10-2013
MO-1 Saree
PW1.Siji.M.B.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Pj/ Forwarded by Order
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
