Delhi

North East

CC/133/2018

L.G. Dass, Advocate - Complainant(s)

Versus

IRCTC LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

26 Sep 2019

ORDER

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 133/18

 

In the matter of:

 

	Shri L.G. Dass, Advocate R/o RPS, DDA Flats Mansarovar Park, Shahdara, Delhi-110032	Complainant
	Versus
1           2	IRCTC Ltd Rail Yatri Niwas Building New Delhi Railway Station Building Ajmeri Gate Side New Delhi-110002   Oriental Bank of Commerce Laxmi Nagar Branch Vikas Marg, Delhi-110092	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:         JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:               DATE OF DECISION      :

10.07.2018 26.09.2019 26.09.2019

 

 

N.K. Sharma, President

Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

Order passed by Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

ORDER

1. Concise facts of the complaint sufficient for deciding the case on merits are briefly recapitulated as that on 21.06.2018, the complainant sought to book an online E-Ticket through OP1 for AC chair car of Swarn Shatabdi Train for his son Rajat Garg from New Delhi to Jalandhar for 30.06.2018 and tried to make payment of              Rs. 975/- through net banking from his savings account no. 04882191000016 maintained with OP2. The complainant received the text message from OP2 on his mobile showing deduction of             Rs. 975/- and his account debited for the said transaction. But the transaction details when accessed on the website of OP1 did not show any PNR number having been generated and booking status showed ‘Not Booked’ for the reason payment failed. The complainant immediately contacted the customer care of OP1 which informed him that his booking was not confirmed as the payment could not be received. Thereafter, on 22.06.2018, OP1 sent a text message on the mobile phone of the complainant that the deducted amount of Rs. 975/- shall be refunded as the ticket could not be booked / service not rendered. Therefore, the complainant alleging unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of OPs by firstly deducting the train fair of Rs. 975/- and secondly by not providing the train ticket thereby admitting no rendering of service was constrained to file the present complaint before this Forum as he was desirous of booking the ticket and not getting refund. The complainant prayed for issuance of directions against the OP to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation for mental and physical harassment and Rs. 11,000/- towards cost of litigation.

Complainant has attached copy of screen shot of mobile message received from OP2 showing debit of Rs. 975/- from complainant’s account, copy of transaction details from OP1 website showing no PNR Number and ticket not booked status with failed transaction history for reason payment failed and copy of screen shot of mobile message receive from OP1 showing Rs. 975/- to be refunded as ticket could not be booked/ service not rendered.

Complainant filed certificate under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act in support of electronic documents (mobile message screen shots).

2.  Notices were issued to the OPs on 26.07.2018. OP1 entered appearance on 12.10.2018 wherein complete paper book was handed over to the counsel of OP1 for filing written statement but neither OP1 appeared thereafter nor filed written statement due to which its right was closed vide order dated 26.11.2018 and was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 10.07.2019. OP2 entered appearance and filed written statement in which it took the preliminary objection of complaint being gross abuse of process of law without any cause of action or any deficiency of service on the part of OP2 having being established by the complainant by way of documentary proof except that the complainant is a customer of OP2 maintaining Savings Bank Account therewith at its Laxmi Nagar, Delhi branch and denied all the allegations leveled against it by the complainant as conspiratorial and extortionist in motive. In its defence, OP2, while admitting the factum of                     the complainant having initiated transaction no. IB SHP/42856396/100001319584362/NEW IRCTC/abc dated 21.06.2018 of Rs. 975/- for booking train ticket which transaction being unsuccessful, amount was reversed in complainant’s account on 22.06.2018, submitted that on receipt of notice of this Forum in the complaint case, OP2 had internally discussed the matter vide e-mails dated 07.08.2018 and 21.08.2018 with regard to the subject transaction and thereafter vide e-mail dated 29.08.2018 to OP1 had sought confirmation / reason for reversal of the transaction which had been refunded on 22.06.2018. in response thereto, OP1 vide return e-mail dated 29.08.2018 assigned the reason as ‘we did not receive Successful Payment response of given txn at IRCTC end in real time that’s why amt has refunded settle after recon’. OP2 further submitted that in addition to the said failed transaction against which the present complaint filed, there was another failed transaction dated 10.07.2018 of Rs. 1,087/- for purchase of medicine but complainant never filed any complaint against the said transaction and prayed for dismissal of complaint under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC for want of any cause of action or maintainability. OP2 filed copy of internal e-mail correspondence alongwith correspondence exchanged with OP1 dated 29.08.2018 enquiring about reason for failed transaction and also filed copy of account ledger / statement of account of complainant highlighting the credit reversal of Rs. 975/- given on 22.06.2018 in his savings account.
3. Rejoinder in rebuttal to the written statement of OP2 was filed by the complainant in which the complainant submitted that he has been a long standing customer of OP2 since 1989 but OP2 showing scant regard for such a long standing relationship, has leveled serious allegation and use harsh language in bad taste to insult the complainant even though it has failed to prove any allegation against the complainant. The complainant admitted to the reversal of the debited amount of Rs. 975/- in transactions dated 21.06.2018 on 22.06.2018 in his savings account but stated that the amount was meant for purchasing online rail ticket and not reversal or refund and regarding the second failed transaction of Rs. 1,087/- complainant submitted he has reserved his right to file the separate complaint for the same. Lastly, the complainant denied any knowledge of email exchanges between OP1 & OP2 and questioned their admissibility as not accompanied certificate under Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act and challenge the prayer of the OP for dismissal of the complaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC has not been applicable to the present proceedings.
4. Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by the both parties exhibiting the respective documents filed / relied upon alongwith the complainant and written statement.
5. Written arguments were filed by the both parties’ reiteration / reassertion of their respective grievance / defence. OP in compliance of order dated 10.07.2019 placed on record certificate u/s 65B of Evidence Act 1872 for emails placed on record at the time of oral arguments.
6. During the oral arguments, counsel for complainant argued that both OPs were deficient of service in having failed to process the online e-ticket booking for which reason no PNR no. are generated for the reason payment fail. Per-contra, OP2 submitted that there was not deficiency of service on its part nor had complainant availed of any “service” as a consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of CPA. OP2 further argued that no consideration was either charge from the complainant or paid by him for the said transaction which is a necessary ingredient for any consumer dispute. OP2 further pointed out that in the prayer clause of complaint, the relief sought is against OP without specifying against which OP.
7. We have heard the rival contentions of both parties and have given our thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced and documents filed. Undisputedly online transaction dated 21.06.2018 for booking e-ticket on OP1 website through OP2 net banking for a sum of Rs. 975/- turned out to be unsuccessful due to OP1 not having received Successful Payment response of given transaction at IRCTC end in real time from OP2 as can be ascertain email exchange between them but it is also admitted fact that said amount was reversed / credited back in complainant’s account the very next day i.e. 22.06.2018. in our view, if the booking of ticket would have been urgent / important as has been stated by complainant sighting reasons for his son’s employment, the complainant would have tried booking for the second time to as is a commonly acceptable / followed practice in online transactions which often fail due to various reasons like server, connectivity, website, portal or such like issues but instead he choose to file the present complaint straight away against the OP.
8. A plain reading of the facts and a simple appreciation of circumstance of case clearly shows that the complaint file before is frivolous and vexatious within the meaning and essence of section 26 of CPA. Consumer Protection Fora are not meant to be a tool for creating ‘nuisance value’ or for indulging in vexatious harassment through frivolous complaints. The vexatious litigation and such frivolous complaints require stern action to be put an end since the time and resource of the Forum get wasted, in such manner, and such evident purpose.
9. We therefore dismiss the complaint as frivolous and vexatious, misconceived and devoid of merits. Anything to otherwise would be a miscarriage of justice. It is also appropriate and albeit necessary to give stern advice of caution to the complainant to desist from misusing the statutory processes provided for for a consumer for better protection of interest under Consumer Protection Act 1986. No order as to cost.
10.  Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
11.   File be consigned to record room.
12.   Announced on  26.09.2019

 

(N.K. Sharma)     President

(Sonica Mehrotra)  Member