Date of Filing: 15.12.2010
Date of Order: 01.04.2011
BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20
Dated: 01ST DAY OF APRIL 2011
PRESENT
Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.
Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.
Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.
COMPLAINT NO: 2929 OF 2010
1. Dr. K. Vinay Kumar
S/o. K. Shankrappa
2. K. Manjunath
S/o. K. Shankrappa
3. K. Swati
W/o. K. Manjunath
4. Dr. K. Seema Rani
W/o. Dr. K. Vinay Kumar
All are residing at No. 132, 1st Floor
3rd Cross, Saraswathi Nagar
Vijayanagar, Bangalore 40 Complainant
V/S
1. The Managing Director
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation
Central Office, Shanti Nagar, Bangalore 27
2. The Depo Manager
N.W.K.R.T.C., Bidar Depot
Bidar Opposite Parties
ORDER
By the President Sri S.S. Nagarale
The complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
The facts of the case are that complainants had booked tickets in KSRTC Bus from Lingasugur to Bangalore as per the reservation slip seat No. 16 to 19 were reserved. Complainants have paid sum of Rs. 1,232/- for all the four tickets. 17.10.2010 was the travelling date. Departure time of the bus was 22.00 hrs from Lingasugur. Complainants waited at the Lingasugur bus stand for arrival of the bus. Even after 11.00 p.m. bus has not arrived. Controller of the Lingasugur bus stand informed the complainants that bus is cancelled and asked the complainants to make their own arrangements to go to Bangalore. The complainants came from Lingasugur to Bangalore by Volvo bus by paying Rs. 2,388/- and reached Bangalore at 10.00 a.m. on 18.10.2010. The complainant No. 1 made to wait at bus stand till 12.00 noon for making enquiry regarding refund of amount and to lodge complaint. Complainant No. 2 is medical practitioner could not reach well in time to hospital. Patients were waiting at the hospital. Other complainants are also working. Great inconvenience were caused to them. Complainants gave written complaint on 18.10.2010 to first opposite party. Even till today opposite parties did not bother to refund the amount. Therefore, complainants left with no other alternative they approached the Hon’ble forum for refund of the amount of Rs. 1,232/- reservation charges and to pay Rs. 2,388/- the Volvo bus charges and to pay compensation of Rs. 40,000/- for causing mental agony.
2. The opposite party filed defence version stating that as per the route sheet of bus No. KA 38 F 573 which has to ply from Aurad to Bangalore plied as per schedule. The said bus reached Lingasugur bus stand and departured from bus stand on 22.30 hrs. Bus reached to the Lingasugur bus stand at 22.30 hrs. Nobody enquired with the conductor or with the bus driver regarding reservation. The opposite party submitted complaint be dismissed.
3. Arguments are heard.
4. Perused the pleadings and documents.
5. The points for consideration are:
1. Whether the complainants have proved deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainants are entitled for relief sought for?
REASONS
6. The complainants have produced reservation ticket PNR No. H19842352, ticket No. 18983454 issued by the opposite party. As per this reservation ticket the complainants have booked their journey from Lingasugur to Bangalore with journey date 17.10.2010. Four seats have been reserved by paying total amount of Rs. 1,232/-. As per the reservation ticket pick up point is at Lingasugur bus stand was 22.00 hrs and departure time is mentioned as 22.00 hrs. It is the case of the complainant that though they were waiting at Lingasugur bus stand for the above bus but the bus did not come in time to the Lingasugur bus stand. The Controller of Lingasugur bus station informed the complainants that bus is cancelled and asked the complainants to make their own arrangement to reach Bangalore. In this way the complainants left with no other alternative came by Volvo bus by paying Rs. 2,388/- for four tickets. The complainants have produced Volvo bus tickets to show that they travelled from Lingasugur to Bangalore through Volvo bus. On reaching Bangalore on 18.10.2010 the complainant informed the matter to the concerned authority i.e. Divisional Controller and a written complaint was also lodged. The complainant demanded refund of the amount but the opposite party did not take any steps to refund the amount. Left with no other alternative the complainants have approached this forum for getting justice. The opposite party No. 2 in the defence version stated that the route sheet of bus has been produced. But along with defence version no such document is produced by the opposite party. The statement of driver and conductor of the bus has not been produced to substantiate the defence. As per the defence version it has been stated that the bus reached Lingasugur bus stand at 22.30 hrs. This is clearly mentioned in the defence version. Whereas in the reservation ticket issued by the opposite party the pickup time from Lingasugur bus stand is 22.00 hrs and the departure time of the bus from Lingasugur is 22.00 hrs. As per the own admission of opposite party themselves it is very clear that the bus reached Lingasugur bus stand at 22.30 hrs that means bus arrived 00.30 mns late. This itself amounts to deficiency of service. The opposite party has not keep up time schedule as per the reservation ticket. The complainants waited at the Lingasugur bus stand. Waiting is great punishment. During the period of waiting one gets tension, mental agony and lot of inconvenience. It is very unfortunate that even after reserving the tickets well in advance the complainants could not travel in the reservation bus and they have to make their own arrangement. The complainants travelled from Volvo bus by paying extra amount and reached Bangalore. The complainant No. 1 had also given written complaint to the opposite party on 18.10.2010 on reaching Bangalore bus stand but the opposite party has not taken any steps to refund the amount. This kind of attitude on the part of opposite party is not proper. A consumer is a most important visitor in any premises of service provider. He is not dependent on the service provider. On the other hand service provider is dependent on him. Complainants have not received proper response from the opposite party, even though a written complaint was filed. First complainant is a Doctor by profession and complainants No. 2 & 3 are also working person. Complainant No. 4 is also Doctor working in Shobha Hospital. The Doctors naturally suffered mental agony and lot of inconvenience on account of the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Therefore, complainants are definitely entitled for the proper relief from the hands of this forum. Consumer Protection Act is social and benevolent legislation intended to protect better interests of consumers. The complainants being a ‘Consumers’ under the definition of ‘Consumer’ in Consumer Protection Act 1987 their interests shall have to be protected by granting relief. The complainants are definitely entitled for Volvo bus charges of Rs. 2,388/- from the opposite parties along with some nominal compensation for mental agony and inconvenience. On the facts and circumstances of the case granting compensation of Rs. 4,000/- for mental agony to the complainants will meet the ends of justice. In the result I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
7. The complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs. 2,388/- the Volvo bus charges along with compensation of Rs. 4,000/- for mental agony. The opposite parties are directed to comply the order within 4 weeks from the date of this order. In the event of non-compliance of the order the above amount carries interest at 6% p.a. from the date of order till payment / realisation.
8. The opposite parties are directed to send the amount as ordered above to the first complainant’s address through D.D. / cheque with intimation to this forum.
9. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately.
10. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 01ST DAY OF APRIL 2011.
Order accordingly,
PRESIDENT
We concur the above findings.
MEMBER MEMBER
