Haryana

Ambala

CC/226/2019

Vikrant Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

INDO Canadian - Opp.Party(s)

Puneet Sirpaul

18 Mar 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case no.         :  226 of 2019

                                                          Date of Institution           :   26.07.2019

                                                          Date of decision              :   18.03.2021.

 

Vikrant Sharma son of Kala Ram, # 204, Jaggi Garden, Phase-1, Ambala City.

……. Complainant.

 

1. Indo Canadian Transport Company, # Near Railway Crossing, G.T. Road, Jalandhar, Punjab-144001, Through its prop/partner/authorized signatory.
2. Indo Canadian Transport Company, #SCO-1064/65, Himalya Marg, Sector-22 B, Chandigarh, Through its MD/Chair Person/Authorized Signatory.
3. Goibio, #5^th Floor, Good Earth City Center, Sector-50, Gurugram-122018.

                                                                                                         

           ….…. Opposite Parties.

 

Before:        Ms. Neena Sandhu,  President.

                   Ms. Ruby Sharma, Member,

Sh. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.          

                            

Present:       Shri Puneet Sirpaul, Advocate, counsel for complainant.

None for the OPs No.1 & 2.

OP No.3 already exparte vide order dated 06.09.2019.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

1. To refund Rs.1,075/- i.e. the cost of the ticket alongwith interest.   
2. To pay Rs.75,000 /- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him and Rs.20,000/- on account for transportation & other expenses incurred by the complainant.

 

Brief facts of the case are that on 25.05.2019, complainant purchased/booked a Ticket vide booking ID GOBUSAND07ee917eb with the OPs No.1 and 2, through OP No.3, by paying Rs.1,075/-, to travel from Ambala Cantt to Shimla, on 26.05.2019. The ticket was issued by the OPs through mail and after taking the printout of the ticket; complainant went to bus stand for boarding the bus at about 1:00 am on 26.05.2019. While boarding the bus at Ambala Cantt bus stand, complainant stunned to see that the seat which was allotted to him was also allotted to some other passenger. He immediately inquired about the same from OPs No.1 and 2, but no satisfactory reply was given by them. The OPs No.1 and 2 had given the said seat to the other person and he requested them to provide a seat to him also but they refused to make any arrangement for him. They also told him that there is no stoppage at Ambala Cantt. bus stand, whereas their buses always stop at Ambala bus stand. The said act of the OPs amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, the present complaint.  

2.       Upon notice, OPs No.1 & 2 appeared through counsel and filed written version by way of affidavit and have admitted the factum of purchase of ticket by the complainant from Ambala Cantt. to Shimla from them through Web portal of Goibibo.com. Complainant has misused process of law as the complainant had boarded the bus of OPs No.1 and 2 from the scheduled stopping point at Ambala Cantt., near Railway Station and travelled up to Shimla. Even otherwise, on the ticket it was specifically mentioned at point No.3 regarding cancellation, the grievances and claims related to the bus journey should be reported to Goibibo support team within 10 days of the travel date, but complainant did not approach the Goibibo within the stipulated period of 10 days rather he filed the present complaint after a period of one month only, just to harass the answering OPs. The complainant purchased the ticket on 25.05.2019, through OP No.3 i.e. Goibibo and seat No.37, was allotted to the him by it, whereas the same seat was allotted to one Mr. Raman directly from the official website of answering OPs on 24.05.2019, due to which the said seat could not be given to the complainant. The complainant was allowed to sit on another seat i.e. seat No.1, which was lying vacant as the person to whom the said seat was allotted did not board the bus and as such no prejudice whatsoever was caused to the complainant. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs No.1 and 2, therefore, complaint filed by the complainant against them may be dismissed with heavy costs.

                   Upon notice, none has appeared on behalf of the OP No.3 before this Commission, therefore, it was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 06.09.2019.

3.                To prove his version, the ld. counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CA along with documents as Annexure C-1 to C-7 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for OPs No.1 & 2 tendered affidavit of Shri Sharanjit Singh son of Hardyal Singh R/o House No.185, Housing Board Colony, Ferozepur, Punjab. as Annexure OP1/A along with documents Annexure OP1/1 and closed the evidence on behalf of the OPs No.1 and 2.

4.                 We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and carefully gone through the case file.

5.                 Perusal of Annexure C-1, reveals that on 25.05.2019, complainant purchased an E-ticket from OPs No.1 and 2 i.e. Indo Canadian Transport Company through OP No.3 i.e. Goibibo, to travel from Ambala to Shimla on 26.05.2019, by paying an amount of Rs.1075/- and seat No.37 was allotted to him. The plea of the complainant is that on 26.05.2019, at about 1:00A.M., when he went to board the bus, then he came to know that seat No.37 was  allotted to some other person also and he was not allowed to sit on the seat No.37. He requested the OPs No.1 and 2, to make some alternative arrangement for him, but they refused to do so. Whereas, the stand of the OPs No.1 and 2, is that no doubt the seat No.37 was allotted to the complainant as well as to some other person, but seat No.1 was provided to the complainant, as the person to whom the said seat was allotted, did not turn up to board the bus. However, no proof in this regard has been placed on record by the OPs No.1 and 2, thus in the absence thereof the contention of the OPs No.1 and 2 cannot be taken as a gospel truth. There is no denying fact that the OPs allotted one seat to two persons, which tantamounts to deficiency in rendering services. Since, it is established that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, therefore they are not only liable to refund the cost of the ticket to the complainant, but are also liable to compensate him for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him.

                    Now coming to quantum of compensation.

                   The complainant has prayed for compensation to the tune of Rs.95,000/- i.e. Rs.75,000/- (for mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant) + Rs.20,000/- (for transport and other expenses). In the case of Surendra Kumar Tyagi Versus Jagat Nursing and Hospital & anr., 2010 CPJ 199 (NC), the Hon’ble National Commission has held that compensation should be commensurate with loss and injury suffered by the complainant. The compensation is required to be fair and just and not unreasonable and arbitrary. The Consumer Fora are not meant to enrich the consumers, at the cost of service providers by awarding unfair, unreasonable and highly excessive compensation. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble National Commission in case titled as Surendra Kumar Tyagi Versus Jagat Nursing and Hospital & anr. (supra) we are of the view that the amount of compensation sought for by the complainant is excessive and thus same cannot be granted. However, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that, if a lump sum amount of Rs.8,000/- be granted to the complainant, it will meet the end of justice.

6.                In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the present complaint and direct the OPs to pay a lump sum amount of Rs.8,000/- jointly and severally, to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, failing which the awarded amount shall carry penal interest @ 5% p.a. from the date of passing of the order till its realization. Certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on :18.03.2021.

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)            (Ruby Sharma)               (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                                   Member                       President