DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No. 120/2008
Rajesh Kumar
S/o Sh. Janardan Singh
R/o 258, Sunehri Bagh Apartment,
Sector-13, Rohini
New Delhi - 110085 ….Complainant
Versus
1. M/s Indian Railway Catering & Tourism Corp. Ltd.
(Also called IRCTC)
5th Floor, Bank of Baroda Building
16, Parliament Street
New Delhi – 110001
2. Railway Board
Through Public Relations Office
Northern Railway, NOCR Building
State Entry Road, New Delhi ….Opposite Parties
Date of Institution: 25.02.2008 Date of Order: 01.10.2016
Coram:
N.K. Goel, President
Naina Bakshi, Member
O R D E R
The case of the complainant, in nutshell, is that he had booked reservation tickets through OP-1’s e-Ticketing Service for his parents Sh, Janardan Singh and Mrs Shanti Devi vide PNR No. 2438218043 on 3.4.2007 for performing journey on 7.4.2007 in 3A Compartment of the train 2818/Jharkhand Express from Delhi to Gaya Jn. and he had made total payment of Rs. 1431/- (Rs. 1456.76p stated at another place). When on 7.4.2007, he along with his parents reached the Old Delhi Railway Station at around 7 p.m. he found that the train was late for about 3 hours and 45 minutes and keeping quite old age of his parents in view he decided to get the tickets cancelled; that when a train gets delayed for more than 3 hours the passengers are entitled to get full refund of the ticket amount. Keeping this in view he approached the Ticket Cancellation Counter but he was told at the Ticket Cancellation Counter at Old Delhi Railway Station that the ticket can only be cancelled through IRCTC electronically. Finding no other way he came back to home along with his parents and sent an e-mail to the OP-1 through whom tickets were purchased/reserved but with no result. The grievance of the complainant is that he pursued the matter with several authorities through correspondence and also attended the Mega Refund Adalat on 20.12.2007 held by OPs on reading an advertisement to this effect in the newspaper and the complainant spent Rs. 300/- towards his car fuel expenditure and parking etc. besides the more precious thing ‘Two hour of Business Time’ but nothing happened. Therefore, pleading deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the OPs, the complainant has filed the present complaint for holding the OPs guilty of deficiency in service, direct the OPs to pay the value of the booked reservation tickets in question along with interest @ 18% w.e.f. 7.4.2007, to pay Rs. 1000/- towards expenses incurred in pursuance of the refund from the OPs and not boarding the train because of its being late for about 4 hours, to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, physical and mental harassment caused to the complainant due to negligence and deficiency in services rendered by the OPs and to pay Rs. 15,000/- towards the litigation expenses.
In its reply, OP-1 has admitted that the parents of the complainant could not use the e-ticket PNR 243-8218043 booked for train No. 1818 on 7th April 2007 because the train was late by 3 hours and 45 minutes. It is stated that CCM/Refunds of South-Eastern Railway was also reminded from time to time by OP-1 from MD (to all CCM through Zonal) to settle all the cases at the earliest. It is stated that in all the cases, if ticket, due to any reason, is not used, the refund is to be settled by the Railways being fare paid in lieu of ticket with them; that on receipt of refunds from the Railways of the unused tickets is credited to the customer’s credit card accounts through the payment gateway and there will be no cash refund at any stage. It is, however, stated that the full amount of Rs. 1406/- on receipt from the Railways had been credited on 17.3.2008 against PNR No. 243-8218043 in the account of the complainant. Other averments made in the complaint have been denied.
OP-2 has been proceeded exparte by our predecessors.
Complaint has filed his own affidavit in evidence. On the other hand, affidavit of Sh. R. Kathiresan, Asst. Manager (Operation) of OP-1 has been filed in evidence on behalf of OP-1.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the complainant and OP-1.
We have heard the arguments advanced at the bar and have also carefully gone through the record.
In the order-sheet dated 7.4.2008 it has been recorded that the complainant had stated before the forum that after filing of the complainant the OPs transferred the fare amount in his account. Therefore, it stands proved on the record that OPs have, infact, refunded the fare amount to the complainant during the pendency of the complaint.
Thus, the only question to be determined by this forum is, whether the complainant is entitled to compensation on account of mental pain and agony due to deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
It is proved on the record that the complainant could not get the refund of the fare amount from the OPs despite making several efforts, doing correspondence and even after attending the Railway’s Mega Refund Adalat on 20.12.2007. Therefore, the complainant had to make unnecessary efforts to get the fare amount refunded from the OPs because of the imperfection on the part of the OPs themselves. Therefore, we hold OPs guilty of deficiency in service and direct them, jointly and severally, to pay Rs. 5000/- in lumpsum for compensation towards mental pain and agony and cost of litigation to the Complainant within 30 days of receipt of copy of this order.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 01.10.16.
Case No. 120/08
28.9.2016
Present – None
Vide our separate order of even date pronounced, the complaint is allowed. OPs are directed, jointly and severally, to pay Rs. 5000/- in lumpsum for compensation towards mental pain and agony and cost of litigation within 30 days of receipt of copy of this order. Let the file be consigned to record room.
