DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSSAL FORUM

WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

 

 

CASE NO:  CC –  111 OF 2017

 

Shri Jitendra Debbarma,

S/O- Shri Khirode Debbarma,

Inspector of School, Khowai Tripura.

 

Home Address:

Old Kalibari Lane, Krishnanagar,

Western side of Magnet Club,

P.O.- Agartala, P.S. West Agartala,,

West Tripura. ….…......Complainant.

 

 

          -VERSUS-

 

1. IRCTC Govt. of India Railway Department,

    (Satabdi Express),

    Train No- 12278,

    East Coast Railway Headquarters

    At Chandrasekharpur,

    Bhubaneswar- 751023.

 

 

2. Station Manager, 

    Badharghat, Rail Station. .............Opposite Parties.

 

 

__________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI  BAMDEB MAJUMDER,

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

 DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SRI U. DAS

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

C o u n s e l

 

For the Complainant : Sri Pijush Kanti Chakraborty,

  Sri Rajib Choudhury,

  Learned Advocates.

        

For the Opposite Parties : Sri Asutosh De,

  Learned Advocate.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT   DELIVERED   ON:  14.11.2018.

 

J U D G M E N T

      The complainant Jitendra Debbarma set the law in motion by presenting the petition U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  complaining deficiency in service by the O.P., IRCTC Govt. of India Railway Department & Station Manager, Badharghat Rail Station to the complainant. Case of the complainant, in short, is that the complainant booked one railway ticket in Agartala for his journey from Bhubaneswar to Howrah vide ticket No. 4939 under PNR No- 610-2259747 in train no- 12278 (Satabdi Express). The departure time of the said ticket as stipulated in the ticket was 07.02 A.M. on 21.06.17 and arrival time of Howrah was at 13.40 hours. It is also stated in the complaint petition that the petitioner also purchased one air ticket for his journey from Kolkata to Agartala on 21.06.17 in Spicejet Airways by Flight No- SG- 278 whose departure time was 5.40 P.M. and arrival time was 6.40 P.M. at Agartala. Price of the said ticket was 2500/-. The complainant further stated in his complaint petition that on 21.06.17  the Satabdi Express started journey from Bbubaneswar  in which he was traveling at 8 A.M. instead of 07.02 A.M. and it had reached at Howrah on the same day at 7.00 P.M instead of 13.40 P.M. Due to the late arrival of the train the petitioner could not avail his Spicejet flight for reaching Agartala. And that due to this the complainant had to stay in Kolkata for one day on 21.06.17. On the next day morning i.e., on 22.06.17 he availed Spicejet flight  vide No- SG 263 and reached Agartala at 9.40 A.M. The price of the said Air ticket was Rs.4418/-. The petitioner alleged that due to the deficiency of the O.P. he had suffered pecuniary loss. He had harassed mentally, professionally etc. so he prayed for for compensation of Rs.1 lac against the O.Ps. 

 

2. The O.P. has contested the claim by filing written objection denying the allegation of the complainant. The case of the O.P. is that on 21.06.17 train bearing No- 12287 from Puri to Howrah Express had to retain on the way to Howrah i.e., on going renovation work non interlocking mechanism of tracks between Bhubeneswar- Baranga section and accordingly all the trains for the same road were blocked for more that the scheduled  departure  at various stations. The O.P. also stated in his written objection that on account of the renovation work on the track the Satabdi Express suffered detention for 75 minutes at Puri for late arrival of link train, 17 minutes between Motari to Khurdha Road for the train No-18416 belonging ahead, 180 minutes between Bhubeneswar  to Barang for bunching of trains due to ongoing  non interlocking works  works and 16 minutes at Nirgunandi for ORGBTPN (Goods train) belonging ahead.

 

3. It is further stated in the written statement of the O.P. that one official notification of the competent authority of Chief Manager of East Coast Railway issued notice vide No.58/NI/Work/BBSM-MCS/2017 dt.13/06/2017 was issued on 13.06.17 for making people aware having being under taking of renovation work on the track. Apart from this the railway Department issued notice in this regard which has been published on 15.06.17 in newspaper namely Times of India, The Sambad and the Samaj, the Sun Marg. According to the O.P. the train was delayed due to unavoidable circumstances which was beyond the control of railway authority and that prior information about late running of train on 21.06.17 was published in newspaper. Hence the O.P. have no liability for the late arrival of Satabdi Express at Howrah Junction. The O.P. has thus prayed for dismissal of the petition  filed the complainant.

 

Evidence adduced by the parties:

4. In this case the complainant himself was examined as P.W-1. He also submitted his examination-in-chief by way of affidavit. He has adduced documentary evidence in support of his case vise train ticket dt. 21.06.17(original) Indian Railway refund Rules(original), spicejet Air ticket dt. 21.06.17, Spicejet Air ticket(original) 22.06.17 boarding pass (original), dt. 22.06.17, these are marked Exhibit- 1 Series.

 

5. The O.P. on the other hand neither adduced oral nor adduced documentary evidence. 

Points for determination:

6. (I) Whether there is deficiency of service of service on the part of the O.P. ?

(II) Whether the complainant is entitled to get comepnsation as prayed for?

Decision and reasons for decision:

7. After going through the complaint petition and also by the evidences on the record we find that the O.P. did not dispute about the journey by the complainant in Satabdi Express No- 12278 dt. 21.06.17 from Bhubeneswar to Howrah. The allegation of the complainant so far as ascertain from his complaint petition is that Satabdi Express in which he was traveling on 21.06.17 departed from Bhubaneswar at 8.00 A.M. Instead of his scheduled time at 07.02 A.M. and the said train reached Howrah at 4.50 P.M. instead of 1.40. P.M. Due to the late arrival of the train at Howrah the petitioner could not catch his flight which was scheduled  to be departed at 4.40 P.M. from Kolkata Airport. The petitioner had to stay at Kolkata for one day and had to purchase fresh ticket for reaching Agartala on the next morning by flight No- SG 263 with an amount of Rs.4418/-. According to the petitioner he had purchased the train ticket from Agartala on 09.04.17 and that he was not aware about the reschedule of the departure time of his train from Bhubaneswar on 21.06.17. Had he been aware of it he could have arrange other mode of his journey from Bhubaneswar to Kolkata and reached Agartala by flight SG 278, tickets of which had been purchased earlier. The O.P's contention that prior information about late departure of the train of the petitioner (Satabdi Express) on 21.06.17 from Bhubeneswar was disseminated through publication by notification in various newspapers namely the Times of India, The Sambad and the Samaj, the Sun Marg on 15.06.17 does not seem to us acceptable or trustworthy as the O.P. did not adduce any documentary proof of it. More over O.P. also did not come forward to adduce oral evidence too. 

 

8. After going through the evidence on record  we are of the considered opinion that the O.P.s has failed to absolve of their liability towards the petitioner for the late running of the train Satabdi Express on 21.06.17 which resulted in causing the petitioner lossing financially and suffer mentally. Since the petitioner has successfully made out the case of deficiency of service against the O.P. We have allowed the complaint petition filed by the petitioner. The petitioner is entitled to get the sum of Rs.4418/-(cost of Air ticket for the journey) on 22.06.17, Rs.400/- being accommodation changes for one day on 21.06.17.  We accordingly direct the O.Ps to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for deficiency of service and Rs.3,000/- as litigation cost along with Rs.4418/-, cost of Air ticket, Rs.4,000/- accommodation charges, total Rs.31,418/-  the petitioner within 2(two) months, failing which it will carry interest @ 9% P.A. 

 

 

    Announced.

 

 

 

 

SRI BAMDEB MAJUMDER 

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA. SRI  U. DAS

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA