By: Smt. R.K.Madanavally, Member
Facts in brief
The complainant a senior citizen, his daughter, son - in-law and one Mr. Kallingal Abdu started their journey from Ajmeer to Shornur on 8.5.14. They were holding a Tatkal waiting Ticket. When they tried to enter in to the train they were restrained by the TTR by saying that they have no ticket. Thereafter the complainant and the other person had taken ordinary ticket and traveled with much difficulties to shornur Railway station.
After reaching Shornur, the complainant had lodged a complaint before station master, Shornur demanding him to refund the amount. The same was acknowledged by the palakkad division and a reply was also sent to him by stating that they were not entitled to refund the amount.
By denying the entire averements in the complaint, the opposite party appeared and filed their detailed version. According to opposite party, the complainant had a wrong notion that if the seat is not confirmed he would get refund even if the journey is performed by them. So the claiming of the refund by the complainant after performing the journey with the wait listed ticket is against the refund rules in force. The rules were clearly mentioned in the version. The fact that the complainant and other members traveled with unreserved tickets were also denied as the number of the ticket was not shown in the complaint, which was submitted before opposite party. He had only quoted the wait listed ticket numbers. In the absence of the of unreserved ticket and its particulars the claim of refund of the amount is fictitious and illegal. Since the complainant had not followed the cancellation rules for getting refund, he himself is liable for the difficulties. So the opposite party is praying for the dismissal of the complaint.
Here, the issues arises for our consideration here in are;
(i) Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation?
(ii) Whether the opposite party has committed any deficiency in service?
(iii) If so relief and cost
Point No.1 to 3.
Both the complainant and opposite party had adduced oral as well as documentary evidence Ext. A1, which was two Rly tickets were produced by complainant. The Ext. A1 tickets were the photo copies of wait listed tatkal tickets Ext. B1 to B4 were marked from the side of the opposite party. Ext. B1 was the copy of the complaint lodged by the complainant before opposite party on 11.05.14. Ext.B2 was the reply sent by southern Railway, palakkad division for Ext. B1. B3 and B4 were the refund rules and time tables of opposite party respectively. While starting on a discussion regarding the deficiency of opposite party, it is pertinent to note that whether the complainant had followed the refund rules followed by opposite party. The refund rules were published for all passengers by the Railway Authority.
In the above case, the complainant had not taken any steps for canceling the ticket. Ext. B3 reads as “the time limit for the cancellation of untraveled wait listed tickets are up to 3 hours after the actual departure of the train, irrespective of the distance and the cancellation charges for passengers is Rs.30/- per passenger”. The above rules were not complied by the complainant when he was cross examined by opposite party, he had deposed that the ordinary tickets were surrendered by him before opposite party while lodging the complaint. It was deposed by him that “ സാധാരണ ticket എടുത്ത കാര്യം ആദ്യമായി പറയുന്നത് കോടതിയിലാണ്. റെയില്വേയോട് പറഞ്ഞിട്ടില്ല. സാധാരണ ticket എടുത്തതിന് രേഖകള് ഹാജരാക്കിയിട്ടില്ല" As per his deposition he was not even aware of the charge of the ordinary ticket. Hence it is admittedly true that there is no proof for the ordinary ticket or its surrender. Perhaps he might not have aware of the cancellation rules of the wait listed Tatkal tickets. The law of the law ignorance of law is not an excuse. So the complainant ought to have canceled the ticket and collected the ordinary ticket. The facts, circumstances and evidence prove that the complainant and his family members had travelled without any ticket from Ajemeer to Shornur. We presumed that, Railway might have shown some magnanimity towards the above persons and thus they reached their destination. So we cannot find out any deficiency in service upon the opposite party and so the complainant is not entitled to get any compensation.
Hence the complaint is dismissed without cost.
Dated this 18th day of March, 2016
A.A.VIJAYAN, PRESIDENT
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : PW1
PW1 : Complainant, A.P.Hamza Haji
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1
Ext.A1 : Photo copy of Railway tickets
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : DW1
DW1 : V.D .Sunny
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Ext. B1 to B3
Ext.B1 : Copy of complaint lodged by the complainant at Shornur Station.
Ext.B2 : Reply letter issued by the opposite party to the complainant, dated 22/05/2014
Ext.B3 : Photo copy of Refund Rules on wait listed tickets available for the information of passengers.
A.A.VIJAYAN, PRESIDENT
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
