Date of Filing 27.11.2023

                                                                                                             Date of Disposal: 08.03.2024

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

THIRUVALLUR

BEFORE TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, MA. ML, Ph.D (Law),                                         …….PRESIDENT

               THIRU.P.MURUGAN, M.Com, ICWA (Inter), BL.,                                                          …….MEMBER-II

CC.No.119/2023

THIS FRIDAY, THE 08^th DAY OF MARCH 2024

Mr.NA.Jayaprakash,

S/o.G.Narayanasamy,

Residing at No.C114, S1/14,

Arch Tech, Residency, 2^nd Main Road,

Near Pillayar Temple,

Thiruvengada Nagar,

Ambattur, Thiruvallur,

Tamil Nadu 600 053.                                                                                ......Complainant.

                                                                              //Vs//

Mr.Pandian,

Rep. by its Manaing Staff

Pattarai Perumbudur Toll Plaza,

Chennai-Tiruttani, Renigunda High Road,

Kanagavallipuram,

Thiruvallur Taluk & District 602 001.                                                 .…..Opposite Party.

Counsel for the complainant                              : Mr.R.Hari Ram Krishnan, Advocate.

Counsel for the opposite party                          :  M/s.P.Arumugavel, Advocate.

This complaint coming before us on various dates and finally on 28.02.2024 in the presence of Mr.R.Hari Ram Krishnan, counsel for the complainant and M/s.P.Arumugavel, counsel for the opposite party and upon perusing the documents and evidences of both sides this Commission delivered the following:

ORDER

PRONOUNCED BY TMT.Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, PRESIDENT

1. This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging deficiency in service against the opposite party with regard to illegal deduction made by the opposite party along with a prayer to direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony had financial loss caused to the complainant along with Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

Summary of facts culminating into complaint:-

            2. It was the case of the complainant that his vehicle No.TN-13-Y-6615 never cross the toll plaza located at Pattaraiperumbudur, Thiruvallur District but through his fast tag account No.3461FA820328EE81BA22DC0 a sum of Rs.80/- was deducted stating that the vehicle traveled between 1.00pm to 1.40 pm on 26.06.2023 but the complainant’s vehicle was left with Popular Vehicle Service Centre located at Vanagaram between the date from 22.05.2023 to 27.06.2023. Immediately after receiving the SMS, the complainant crosschecked with the Service Centre.  However he was informed that his vehicle was never taken out of Service Centre on any of the days.  The complainant issued a legal notice on 30.06.2023 to the opposite party to furnish the service details on the disputed date.  However in the reply notice it was stated that the Toll Plaza was not functioning on that particular date due to heavy torment wind and rain and also asked the complainant to make a complaint on irregularity of the opposite party to NHAI Head Office.  Thus aggrieved the present complaint was filed for the reliefs mentioned above.

The crux of the defence put forth by the opposite party:-

3. The opposite party filed version disputing the complaint allegations contending inter alia that the Toll amount Rs.80/- was not wrongly debited on the complainant’s vehicle and that vehicle crossed over the Toll Plaza on 26.06.2023 between 1.00pm to 1.40pm. It was submitted that from 03.06.2023 to 22.06.2023 all the scanners, CCTV Cameras and the automatic system were not working in the Toll Plaza due to heavy torment wind and rain that occurred on 03.06.2023.  The employees of Toll Plaza recorded the Registration number and their corresponding Fast Tag ID manually for all the vehicles that had crossed the Toll Plaza.  This was done by an individual team for each lane in order to avoid any wrong entry and discrepancy and there were more than 6000 entries and no complaints made by any one. Complainant’s vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 13 Y 6615 had crossed the Toll Plaza of the opposite party on 03.06.2023 at about 01.08 pm and 04.06.2023 at about 01.38 hours in lane 6. The transaction details were sent to National Highways Authority of India through email and in turn they have debited charges on 26.06.2023 for the vehicles crossed in between the period 03.06.2023 to 22.06.2023. The opposite party could not take the fast tag amount directly. The Fast Tag account belongs to the NHAI, not under the control of the opposite party and the opposite party would get money from only NHAI.  The complainant without knowing the process or actual facts had filed the complaint against the opposite party alone without arraying NHAI, who was a necessary party. When there was no fault on the part of opposite party they are wrongly arrayed as opposite party.  Hence the complaint is liable to be rejected for non joinder of necessary party. The vehicle in issue had crossed various Toll Plazas in between the period from 22.05.2023 to 26.06.2023.  The opposite party could not act without direction of the NHAI.  It was submitted that the National Highway Authority of India was the proper and necessary party for any claim in the complaint for deficiency of services of the Toll Plaza as it belongs to NHAI.  The complainant had failed to approach the National Highways Authority of India who was the appropriate person and further he had failed to avail the customer service helpline No.1033 provided to the consumer, even after informing the complainant by the opposite party’s reply notice dated 12.07.2023.  Hence the present complaint was liable to be dismissed in limine for failing to approach the proper party. Complainant had not added the NHAI who was the proper and necessary party.  Hence the present complaint was liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of the necessary party.

4. On the side of complainants proof affidavit was filed and documents marked as Ex.A1 to Ex A5 were submitted. On the side of opposite party proof affidavit was filed and documents marked as Ex.B1 to Ex.B3 were submitted.

Points for consideration:-

1)   Whether the complaint as filed was bad for non-joinder of necessary party and not maintainable as the National Highways Authority of India was not made a party to the proceedings?

2) If maintainable, whether the complainant has proved the allegation of illegal deduction by the opposite party as deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

3) If so to what relief the complainant is entitled?

Point No.1:-

            5. The opposite party in their version had raised a preliminary defence that the complaint filed without joining the National Highways Authority of India is not maintainable as the complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary party.  Therefore we tried to discuss the issue as to maintainability of the complaint at the preliminary stage before going into the merits of the case.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant argued that there was no proof from the opposite party to establish that the vehicle crossed the Toll Plaza located at Pattaraiperumbudur on 03.06.2023 and 04.06.2023.  Further it was argued by him that when the opposite party was questioned it is contended by them that the CCTV Cameras were not functioning between 03.06.2023 to 22.06.2023. As the complainant’s vehicle was with the Service Centre for that particular period there was no chance for his vehicle to cross the said Toll Plaza.  Thus he sought for Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation along with cost of the complaint.

7. On the other hand, the opposite party argued that the complainant has to approach the National Highways Authority of India as they are the Authorities under whom the opposite party was working.  During the period 03.06.2023 to 22.06.2023 the Toll Plaza manually entered the details of the vehicles crossed and that the same was sent to National Highways Authority of India which deducted the charges.  Further, it is their main contention that when there arise a dispute, the complainant ought to have approached the National Highways Authority of India to sought out his grievances.  Thus, contending that National Highways Authority of India is a proper and necessary party without whom the complaint could not be decided they sought for the complaint to be dismissed.

8. We perused the pleadings and material evidences produced by both parties.

9. The complainant aggrieved by the deduction of fast tag charges had contacted the Toll Plaza where the vehicle was said to have crossed for which charges were deducted.  However even in the reply notice issued by the opposite party they had clearly stated that when there is any discrepancy in the amount debited to the vehicle owners they can call the Toll Plaza help line No.1033 and submit their grievances and that on the instructions/directions given by the ‘National Highways Authority of India Head Office’ they would refund the excess amount charged back to the vehicle owners. In the present case it is seen that though the opposite party in their reply notice and also in their written version has categorically stated that the National Highways Authority of India is a necessary party to the complaint as only under the NHAI Authorities the opposite party and all other Toll Plaza were functioning.  Further it was also the defence of opposite party that when there is any discrepancy in the payment, the vehicle owners could very well call the National Highways Authority of India help line No.1033.  It is also seen that when there is no fault on the part of National Highways Authority of India or Toll Plaza the concerned Bank with which the Fast Tag was availed could be contacted.  Therefore the complaint filed without adding National Highways Authority of India to whom the Fast tag Account belongs as a party is not maintainable as the opposite party cannot act without the directions of the National Highways Authority of India.  Also the complaint filed without entertaining the available grievance redressal Mechanism, the present complaint could not be entertained when it is the specific case of the opposite party that the Fast Tag Account belongs to National Highways Authority of India and that all the details were only forwarded to National Highways Authority of India and was available only with them. Thus we answer the point accordingly holding that the complaint as filed without joining National Highways Authority of India is not maintainable before this Commission.

10. In a similar case Before the District Consumer Disputes Forum Ambala, in CC.372 of 2021 vide order dt. 14.12.2023 in Sartaj Singh vs National Highway Authority of India and ors, it was held that

“When it is established that the vehicle did not cross at the relevant point of time, for the deduction made in fast tag, the Bank which issued fast tag should be held responsible.”

Therefore, to decide as to who is at fault in disputed fast tag deductions National Highway Authority of India is considered to be a necessary and proper party for such a dispute. Thus we answer the point accordingly in favour of the opposite party and as against the complainant.

 Point No.2 & 3:-

11. As we have held above that the complaint is not maintainable before this Commission we do not delve into the merits of the complaint.  Thus we answer the points accordingly.

In the result, the complaint is dismissed.  No order as to cost.

Dictated by the President to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this 08^th day of March 2024.

          -Sd-                                                                                                                 -Sd-                                                                                                                

 MEMBER-II                                                                                                       PRESIDENT

List of document filed by the complainant:-

List of documents filed by the opposite party:-

      -Sd-                                                                                                                       -Sd-                                                                                                           

MEMBER-II                                                                                                          PRESIDENT