Order No.                 .

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

          Complainant, a senior citizen bought e-tickets for journey from Hasidim Jn. to Howrah for himself, his wife, sister and brother-in-law.  They started on 21-09-2013 the complainant was suffering from blood sugar, pressure, knee pain and some kind of pulmonary discomfort he cannot sit into a non-airy stuffing situation for a long period of time.  So, he chose a window side seat for himself, while purchasing e-tickets for 4 heads that in the row of 3 at least one seat will be at the window side and that seat was allotted to the complainant.  window-side seat no is 35.  The complainant and his family members were relieved thinking that the complainant would enjoy a comfortable journey for five hours in the train.

          After boarding the train, the complainant found that the seat no.35 in coach DR1 was preoccupied by another passenger.  Naturally, the complainant requested the passenger to vacate that seat as it was allotted to him.  But that passenger was not ready to leave the seat.  The complainant told him about his difficulty.  As the row of the seats was just at the end of the coach, he too has to face the suffocative situation.  Because there was very short space between seat and the wall portion of the coach.  After few minutes, the ticket checker came.  The complainant informed him that the same seat is allotted to both the passengers.  The complainant also requested the ticket checker to arrange for another window-side seat but he could not help the complainant in this regard.

          After reaching home, the complainant felt uncomfortable.  After some time, his illness got aggravated.  He contacted with his physician on the same night, i.e. on 21^st September, 2013.  The doctor prescribed medicines and advised him to take rest for seven days.  The complainant almost took a fortnight to get over from his ailments.

          He suffered mainly from pulmonary discomfort, because of shortage of space in the coach.  Because the coach was a non-A/c one.  So, he has to face severe problem.  As per versions of the complainant he needed the window side seat for having a comfortable peaceful and hazard free journey.  But in spite of purchasing the tickets in time, he failed to get that.

          The complainant suffered inexplicably for pulmonary discomfort and knee pain.  The complainant faced severe trouble because the coach was a non-A/c one and the space was narrow.

          It is the humble submission of the complainant before the Hon’ble Forum to penalize the Eastern Railway.  The complainant demands Rs.2,00,000/- as compensation which would compensate his severe sufferings to some extent.  The complainant wants that this verdict would send a strong message to the railway authorities to render adequate service to its passengers.

          The complainant again states that owing to negligence in rendering proper services by the railway authorities and its faulty system, passengers face trouble and sufferings.  So, they must be penalized.

          The OP, i.e. General Manager, Eastern Railway submits that the complainant is prima facie, mala fide, speculative, harassive and inconclusive.  Hence, the complaint is devoid of merit.  The complainant’s complaint is based on unfounded facts.  The Ld. Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to decide the aforesaid complaint in so far as the issue is involved.  The train i.e. 12023/12021 Howrah-Patna-Patna-Howrah Jana Satabdi Express belongs to East Central Railway administration the headquarter f which is at Hazipur and the reserved coaches of the said train are manned by the ticket checking staff of Patna under East Central Railway.  So, Eastern Railway is in no way responsible for any deficiency of service.

          It appears from the photocopy of e-ticket under PNR No.6322716431 was booked on 23-08-2013 through IRCTC website for journey of Sri D. Majumdar and other three passengers in second sitting class.  Coach No.DR1 of train No.12024 for journey on 21-09-2013 from Hasidim to Howrah Jn.

          The complainant has mentioned that seat no.35 was allotted to him.  But it is evident from the e-ticket that seat no.36 was allotted to him.  The copy of the standard design of WGSC 2J coach shows that both the seat nos.35 and 36 are window side seats.  The photocopy of the Reservation chart of coach DR1 of the said train of 21-09-2013 shows that the seat no.36 was allotted to the complainant seat no.35 was allotted to another passenger named Mr. Rakesh Gupta.

          In view of the above facts the OP states that the complainant tried to mislead the court by giving false data.

          OP1 further states that the coach DR1 of Janasatabdi Express belongs to East Central Railway.  So, it is not possible for the OP{Eastern Railway) to offer any comment as to the alleged behaviour of the on-board ticket checking staff.

          OP states in his version that the complainant told that he fell sick on board.  But after getting down from the train he never complained to any authority of Eastern Railway.  So, the Eastern Railway is not responsible for the alleged deficiency in service. 

          Henceforth OP states that the complaint should be dismissed with exemplary cost.

Decision with Reasons

On proper study of the complaint and the written version and Evidence-in-Chief and also the written version as made by the OP, Railway Authority it is found that it is undisputed fact that the complainant along with his wife, sister and brother-in-law boarded train Josidih on 21-09-2013 for reaching at Howrah by Janasatabdi Express.  It is also an admitted fact that they had their reserved tickets in non-sleeper coach i.e. in chair car.  They were to reach their destination on the same day, i.e. on 21-09-2013.  But the moot question is whether complainant was allotted any seat in the said reserved coach on the date of his journey by the OP at all.

          In this regard we have relied upon the argument of the OP to the effect that admittedly the ticket which was purchased by the complainant is an IRTC E-ticket and admittedly four persons of the complainant’s family i.e. including the complainant an aged person purchased 4 tickets for their journey by Janasatabdi Exp. from Josidih to Howrah on 21-09-2013 and in the e-ticket there is no seat number. 

          It is admitted by the OP that the complainant and his family members 3 persons i.e. 4 persons boarded at the train at Josidih Station as their journey commenced from Josidih and for their arrival at Howrah and on boarding in the said train complainant showed the E-ticket on on-duty TTE who specifically noted that in the said coach there were 81 seats but not 93 and his seat number would be 35 in place of 36 which was noted by the on-duty TTE but complainant did not avail of that seat though that seat is also situated on the window side and in support of that railway authority also placed sitting arrangement map of the particular coach wherefrom it is found that seat No.35 is situated on the window side at the same time 36 is also situated on the window side.  So, OP submitted that the allegation of the complainant that complainant did not get window side seat is completely false and if we rely upon the said map view of the said coach we are convinced that 35 and 36 both the seats are situated on the window side.  Then question is why the complainant is claiming that he did not get window side seat.

          Further OP has submitted also the reservation chart and from the said reservation chart it is clear that Dilip Majumdar, the complainant was allotted in the said coach against seat No.36 from Josidih to Howrah but starting point of the said train Janasatabdi is from Patna Jn. to Howrah Jn.  Admittedly, as per reservation chart a person namely U.N. Mishra had a reserved ticket from Patna to Josidih for which in the reservation seat against seat No.36 two persons name are included.  First at the starting point in the name of U.N. Mishra who availed of the said seat from Patna for completing his journey at Josidih.  So, his name is first included in the said reservation list against seat no.36 then it is clear that U.N. Mishra got down from the said seat and train after completion of his journey at Josidih and the present complainant’s reservations in respect of the said seat was correct and as he started his journey from Josidih when U.N. Mishra left and got down from the train when his journey completed there as per reservation list then from Josidih to Howrah the seat was rightly reserved as per reservation list from Josidih to Howrah for the complainant then question is that what reasons TTE noted that the complainant seat shall be 35 in place of 36.

          Another factor is that if we rely that defence of the OP that complainant was actually allotted 35 in place of 36 then OP shall have to prove that reservation seat no.35 was vacant as per reservation list but we are very much sure that said No.35 was allotted to one Rakesh Gupta from Patna to Howrah so that seat no.35 was not vacant from Josidih to Howrah but it was kept by a bona fide ticket holder that is Rakesh Gupta so the note as made by the TTE for the e-ticket is false and fabricated and defence of the OP is proved a false defence and on the contrary complainant’s allegation is that his seat was occupied by non-reserved passenger at the behest of the TTE is well proved that means this valid reservation seat of the complainant was sold by the TTE to unauthorized person after taking money.  But peculiar factor is that OP took a defence that seat no.35 is situated on the window side and it was allotted to the complainant but their document simply proves that the defence as made by the OP is not only false but also fabricated and they tried to mislead this Forum in such a manner so that they may be excused by this forum that their act was very correct but whole conduct of the OP cleared like water that the OPs staff, TTE took huge money from unauthorized passenger and allotted the seat of the complainant i.e. 36 from Josidih to Howrah and enjoyed bribe and that bribe-taker has been supported by the present OP whatt simply proves that complainant as an aged person who has suffered from several diseases, suffered mentally and physically and practically as a bona fide passenger having valid reservation seat was harassed by the TTE of the railways and for which the complainant is entitled to compensation from the OP when the OP’s entire defence as per their demand is proved false attitude and at the same time we have gathered that the mal practice has been practiced by the OP in all respect and the present OP Deputy Chief Commercial Manager/KJ is also one fraud-star and he is the very supporter of TTE/Coach conductor.  The whole conduct of the railway administration appears to us an unfair trade practice that was adopted on that date by the TTE and coach conductor but that mal practices has been supported by the present Deputy Commercial Manager.  It indicates that present Deputy Commercial Manager also consume the juice of the bribe which has been taken by that TTE who allotted that bona fide seat of the complainant i.e. 36 to unauthorized person and that is the very clear picture of malpractices of the OP and railway authority and for their immoral and ill misbehavior, and at the same time also for negligent and deficient manner of service complainant was harassed and for which complainant’s entire allegation is proved as truth but not motivated rather the defence as taken by the OP is a false and fabricated defence. 

In the result, the case succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest with a cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) against the OP.         

          OP is hereby directed to pay a compensation of Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty five thousand only) to the complainant for causing mental pain, agony, harassment and sufferings to the complainant even he had his valid reservation ticket against seat No.36 from Josidih to Howrah on 21-09-2013.

          OPs entire business practice is no doubt an unfair trade practice and that has been practiced by their TTE and others and practically the fraud has been practiced by the TTE on that date only to deceive the bona fide senior citizen passenger in such a manner for which punitive damages of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) against OP is imposed for the purpose of checking the malpractice and deceitful manner of practice of the employee of the OP and it shall be deposited to this Forum.

Entire order as passed against the OP shall be satisfied and complied by the OP within one month from the date of this order failing which for each day’s delay penal interest @250/- shall be assessed and it shall be deposited to this Forum by the OP Authority.

OPs are directed to comply the order within the stipulated period and for disobeyance and non-compliance of the Forum’s order they shall be prosecuted u/s.27 of the C.P. Act and for which further penalty and fine shall be imposed against them.