DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA.

                                                Complaint No. CC/010/373 of  21.5.2010   

                                                Decided on:   8.9.2010

Krishan Chand Sharma son of Puran Chand Sharma, resident of B-125, Azad Nagar, Sirhind Road, Patiala.

                                                                             -----------Complainant

                                      Versus

1.                 M/s Tagore Theater Ltd.,Model Town, Patiala through its Managing Director.

2.                 Managing Director M/s Tagore Theater Ltd., Model Town, Patiala.

3.                 Manager M/s Tagore Theater., Model Town, Patiala.

                                                                             ----------Opposite parties.

                                      Complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act.                                   

                                      QUORUM

                                      Sh.Inderjit Singh, President

                                      Sh.Amarjit Singh Dhindsa,Member

                                      Smt.Neelam Gupta, Member

Present:

For the complainant:     Sh. Bir Devinder Singh, Advocate   

For opposite parties:     Ex-parte.

                                         ORDER

SH.INDERJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

                                      Complainant Krishan Chand has brought this consumer complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 as amended up to date ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against  the opposite parties fully detailed and described in the head note of the complaint.

2.                                   As per averments made in the complaint the case

of   the complainant is like this:-

                                      That on 1.5.2010, the complainant alongwith his friend had gone to Tagore Theater for watching movie at about 3:30 p.m. and had purchased two tickets for balcony vide tickets No.096937 and 096938 to see motive “Ekam” and had paid Rs.100/- for both tickets. That the film actor Babbu Mann had also come to promote his film “Ekam” and the theater was thus over crowded. That the opposite parties had sold more number of tickets than the number of seats available in the balcony. That when after purchasing the tickets, the complainant and his friend-Hardeep Singh son of S.Nirmal Singh entered the balcony, the employees of opposite parties pushed the complainant and his friend –Hardeep Singh out of the balcony and said that the balcony is full and there is no seat available for the complainant and his friend-Hardeep Singh. That then the employees of opposite parties rudely asked the complainant to sit in the hall, but the complainant requested them that he has purchased the tickets for balcony, then why he should sit in the hall, especially when the ticket price of the hall is much lesser than the balcony and also requested them either to refund the margin of balcony ticket price and hall ticket price, but they refused and said that “w{th d/yDh j? sK d/y Bjh sK ikT, ;kv/ eb ckbs{ rZb tk;s/ eJh NkfJw Bjh, i/eo pkbeBh ftu ;hN Bjh fwbh sK w? eh eoK, ckbs{ ftu w/ok f;o Bk ykT.

That then the complainant under compelled circumstances sat in the hall instead of the balcony as the balcony was full and the complainant requested the Manager to refund the difference of the balcony ticket and the ticket of hall, but he refused to do so. This shows that the opposite parties are doing mal practice. That earlier Punjab Govt. through Excise and Taxation Department had raided the Tagore Theater and found that the chairs fitted in the theater were much more than the permission taken from the Govt. for running the theater and imposed penalty on account of entertainment tax per chair vide its office memo No.5106/Entt dated 9.8.2002, 2020-2032 dated 28.5.2002 and No.3277-3282 dated 7.6.2002 for recovery of Rs.1,02,61655/-That there was no seat number on the tickets, which is very much necessary to avoid such inconvenience for viewers. The numbers on the tickets were not printed because they can not print the numbers on the tickets with regard to the plastic chairs which they used to put in rows temporarily. That then the complainant was compelled to watch movie in hall, where the complainant suffered from suffocation. During interval the complainant also came to know that the prices of cold drinks, pop corns etc. are very high, even from the M.R.Ps which is also illegal. That even the ticket price for hall was not adjusted towards the tickets purchased for balcony on many requests. That the complainant has suffered harassment, mental agony at the hands of the opposite parties due to deficiency in services and rude behaviour of Manager of Tagore Theater Ltd. That all the facts and circumstances mentioned above clearly show that the opposite parties are indulged in mal practice and deficiency in providing services. Hence this complaint.

3.                                   Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties wherein they were directed to put in appearance in the Forum on 28.6.2010 but they having failed to put in appearance were proceeded against exparte on 30.6.2010.

4.                                   In order to prove his case the complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit,Ex.C1, tickets,Ex.C2, copy of suit filed by the opposite parties,Ex.C3, copy of written statement filed by Govt.Ex,C4, copy of letter dated 24.12.2002,Ex.C5, copy of letter,Ex.C6, copy of letter dated 17.6.2002,Ex.C7, copy of letter dated 23.2.2000,Ex.C8, copy of letter by Tagore Theater,Ex.C9, copy of letter dated 2.3.2001, Ex.C10, copy of judgment,Ex.C11 and affidavit,Ex.C12 of Hardeep Singh.

5.                                   The complainant has filed the written arguments. We have gone through the same and have also heard the learned counsel for the complainant.

6.                                   Admittedly the complainant had purchased tickets bearing no.096937 and 096938 for balcony. The perusal of the tickets would show that each ticket is worth Rs.50/- .The allegation of the complainant is that he had to sit in the hall to see the picture although he had purchased the tickets for balcony especially when the price of the ticket of the hall is much lesser than the balcony. It is also the case of the complainant that inspite of making requests to the opposite parties they did not refund the margin of the balcony ticket price  and hall ticket price. Moreover the perusal of the tickets issued by the opposite parties show that there is no seat number mentioned to avoid inconvenience to the viewers. From the evidence lead by the complainant it is clear that the opposite parties are indulging in mal practice and are causing inconvenience to the viewers when the shows are over crowded. We hold the opposite parties to be deficient in rendering the service to its viewers.

7.                                   In view of the above discussion we allow the complaint partly and direct the opposite parties to refund the price of the tickets of Rs.100/- paid by the complainant and further direct to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- as compensation for harassment inconvenience and mental torture to the complainant. The opposite parties shall pay this amount within a period of one month from the receipt of copy of this order. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.

                                      File be consigned to the record.

Pronounced.

Dated:8.9.2010.

                                                                             President

                                                                             Member

                                                                             Member