Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd., Office B-148, 11th Floor, Statesman House, Barkhamba Road, New Delhi-11001.
…..Opposite party
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
QUORUM:
SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT
SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER
COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:
For complainant : Sh. Varun Gupta, Advocate.
For OP : Ms. Mamta Kaura, Advocate.
ORDER
PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT
1. In nutshell, the case of the complainant is that he booked seven train tickets on the website of the OP for 26.12.2021 for travelling from Shmata VD Katra to Ludhiana. On 26.12.2021, the train did not reach the station of boarding that Shmata VD Katra. The complainant was not informed about the cancellation any time prior to the slated departure of the train. Even though the train was cancelled, the OP did not refund the amount of the tickets despite the fact that the complainant wrote many emails to the OP. This amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OP. The complainant is entitled to refund of the booking amount of Rs.1844/-. In the end, it has been requested that the OP be made to refund the amount of Rs.1844/- along with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-.
2. The complaint has been resisted by the OP. In the written filed on behalf of the OP, it has been pleaded that the OP only provides access to railway passenger reservation system for booking of tickets but it does not have any role in operation of train services which is the subject matter of Indian Railways. According to the OP, whenever the train is cancelled partially on its run, the refund is granted through TDR and passengers are required to file online TDR within 72 hours of schedule departure of the train from the boarding station of the passengers. As the online TDR was not filed by the complainant within the stipulated time, the complainant was not entitled to any refund. However, as a goodwill gesture, the OP arranged a refund of the ticket fare of Rs.1275/- & Rs.510/- which has already been paid to the complainant on 23.04.2022 vide PNR No.22713208856 and 2232323659. The OP has further pleaded that the tickets booked by the complainant were also waitlisted at 81 to 86. The complainant was required to find out whether the tickets were confirmed and he had done so, he would have come to know that the train has been cancelled. The other averments made in the complaint have been denied as wrong and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has also been made.
3. The complainant did not formally tender any evidence but submitted affidavit along with documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C6 in support of the complaint.
4. The OP also did not formally tender any evidence but submitted affidavit of Sh. Amarjit Singh Bagla, Manager Catering Services of the OP.
5. We have heard the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and gone through the record carefully.
6. During the course of arguments, the counsel for the OP has contended that the OP Corporation was responsible only for booking the tickets and in case the train was cancelled due to which the complainant could not utilized the tickets, the OP Corporation is not responsible and for that only Indian Railways are responsible. The counsel for the OP has further contended that on this part, the OP as a goodwill gesture has already refunded the booking amount of Rs.1785/- to the complainant. The counsel for the OP has further contended that since the complainant has not impleaded Indian Railways as party, the complaint deserves to be dismissed on this ground alone.
7. On the other hand, the counsel for the complainant has argued that the tickets were booked by the OP and, therefore, the OP was responsible informing in advance in case the booking had been cancelled but no prior information was given by the OP to the complainant. The counsel for the complainant has further contended that the OP has refunded the booking amount only after the filling of the complaint and having refunded the booking amount, the OP Corporation cannot claim that it was not responsible if the train itself was cancelled. The counsel for the complainant has further contended that due to cancellation of the train, the complainant was put to acute inconvenience. Therefore, the OP must be made to pay the damages and compensation as prayed for in the complaint.
8. We have weighed the contentions raised by the counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
9. It is the definite case of the complainant that he had booked seven tickets from the website of the OP for 26.12.2021 from Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Katra to Ludhiana. In para No.4 of the complaint, it has been specifically pleaded that the complainant was not informed about the cancellation of the train on the appointed day and the refund of the booking was also not paid to the complainant though many emails were sent to the OP. In para No.4 of the complaint, it has been mentioned that the tickets booked by the complainant were in the waiting list and it was for the complainant to check whether the tickets were confirmed or not. Moreover, online TDR was not filed by the complainant within stipulated time with the result that the refund was not generated. However, the OP has not specifically denied that no prior information was given to the complainant regarding cancellation of the train. The question of checking on the part of the complainant as to whether the tickets were confirmed or not does not arise as the train itself was cancelled without any prior information to the complainant.
10. Secondly, if the OP had no liability for the refund of the booking amount then how come the refund of Rs.1785/- was made and that too after the filing of the complaint. The OP has further not placed on record that the emails sent by the complainant were responded to by the OP. This clearly amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OP. Even though the refund of the tickets has already been made, in the given circumstances, it would be just and proper if the OP is directed to pay a composite compensation and cost of Rs.3500/- to the complainant.
11. As a result of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with a direction to the OP to pay a composite cost and compensation of Rs.3,500/- (Rupees Three Thousand Five Hundred only) to the complainant. Compliance of order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
(Jaswinder Singh) (K.K. Kareer)
Member President
Announced in Open Commission.
Dated:29.09.2022.
Gobind Ram.
Karan Kumar Vs IRCTC CC/22/108
Present: Sh. Varun Gupta, Advocate for the complainant.
Ms. Mamta Kaura, Advocate for the OP.
Arguments heard. Vide separate detailed order of today, the complaint is partly allowed with a direction to the OP to pay a composite cost and compensation of Rs.3,500/- (Rupees Three Thousand Five Hundred only) to the complainant. Compliance of order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
(Jaswinder Singh) (K.K. Kareer)
Member President
Announced in Open Commission.
Dated:29.09.2022.
Gobind Ram.
