BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Vinod Kumar Sharma, s/o Sh. B.C. Sharma, r/o #227-A, Sector 30-A, Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

                           V E R S U S

Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation Chandigarh, Room No. 9, Enquiry Booth No.5, Centre Booking Agency(CBA), ISBT, Sector -43, Chandigarh through its Traffic Manager.

                                  ……Opposite Party

CORAM:  SH.JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL PRESIDENT

              DR.(MRS) MADHU BEHL       MEMBER

Argued by: Complainant in person.

Sh. Arun Sood, Adv. for OP.

PER SHRI JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDENT

             Succinctly put, the complainant booked three tickets for 25.06.09 in A.C deluxe bus no. HP-34-8745 for Manali and seat no. 15, 16 and 17 were allotted to him by the OP. The complainant stated that on the day of the journey he was provided with only one seat and came to know that the OP had already allotted the other two seats to somebody else in advance. The complainant made repeated requests to the conductor of the OP regarding the above facts but was of no use. However, the complainant adjusted himself alongwith his family on one seat only, though he had made a payment for three seats. Despite several requests, the conductor of the OP had not even returned the booking amount paid for the said two seats. The complainant reported the above facts to the Adda In-charge, Manali, also but was of no use at all.  Hence this complaint alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

2.             Notice was served to the OP. In their written reply the OP admitted to the extent that the complainant was allotted seat no. 15 and 17.  The OP further admitted that all had happened due to the technical fault in the booking computer for advance booking of tickets on 25.06.09, two tickets were issued over and above the total number of seats in the bus at the time of current booking at sale counter and when this fact came to the knowledge of the staff of the OP that out of three tickets which were issued to the complainant from current booking counter, two tickets have already been booked and reserved in advance by some other passenger. The staff of the OP explained and requested the complainant to take back the refund of all the three tickets or to go by next bus but the complainant refused to take back the refund and insisted to travel by the same bus. Denying all the material allegations of the complainant the OP pleaded that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

3.             The Parties led evidence in support their contentions.

4.             We have heard parties and have also perused the record. 

5.             It is admitted by the OP that the complainant had booked three seats in advance out of which two seats had already been booked for some other passengers. Their contention is that it all happened due to the technical fault in booking computer for advance booking of tickets but no such proof has been attached to suggest if there was any fault with the computer or the data. It appears that the OPs intentionally over booked the bus which is an unfair trade practice and has been condemned by the Consumer Fora, time and again.  Needless to mention that due to this over booking, the consumers are the sufferers, as in the present case they had to travel a long distance in the bus from Chandigarh to Manali and suffered mental torture and physical discomfort.

6.             Even after the over booking came to the notice of the conductor or the booking staff at the bus stand they did not refund the amount to the complainant nor arranged the seats in the next bus even inspite of the fact that the complainant lodged a complaint in the Log Register of the said bus as mentioned in concluding lines of para 3 of the complaint.  As against it, the contention of the OP is that he was offered the refund and also the seat in the next bus but he declined.  The OPs did not obtain anything in writing from the complainant if he was willing to travel in the same bus without seats. Had the conductor obtained this in writing from the complainant, there would not have been any dispute between the parties.  However, it appears that no such effort was made by the conductor or the booking staff either to refund the amount or to allot him seats in the next bus.  We cannot believe that the complainant would have offered to travel without a seat, the entire long journey from Chandigarh to Manali as is projected by the OPs.  There was therefore certainly deficiency in service on the part of the OPs not only in the over booking of the seats but in not accommodating the complainant in the next bus or to refund the amount to him so as to allow him to board any other bus heading for Manali.

7.             In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the present complaint must succeed.  The same is accordingly allowed. The OPs are directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation for over booking seats and causing the complainant mental and physical harassment. The amount alongwith Rs.1,100/- as costs of litigation shall be paid within 30 days from the receipt of the copy of this order, failing which they would be liable to pay the entire amount alongwith interest @12% p.a. since the filing of the present complaint i.e. 11.08.09, till the amount is actually paid to the complainant.

8.             The OPs would be free to recover this amount from the conductor or the booking staff/officials after giving them an opportunity of being heard under the relevant rules applicable to the employees.

              Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.  The file be consigned.