Delhi

New Delhi

CC/956/2014

Vaibhav & Anr. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Northern Railway &Anr. - Opp.Party(s)

30 Jan 2020

ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC. 956/2014                                                                    Dated:

In the matter of:

1.          Sh. Vaibhav

R/o House no. A-3/31,

Sec-11, Rohini,

New Delhi-110041

 

2.          Master Ekansh

R/o House no. A-3/31,

Sec-11, Rohini,

New Delhi-110041

                                                                              ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

1. Northern Railways

         Through Chief Operating Manager

          Room no. 30-G, G.M. Building

          Baroda House , New Delhi-110001

 

2. Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd.

         Through Manager

         9^th Floor Bank of Baroda Building

      16, Parliament Street

       New Delhi-110001

                                                                                                                                         ….....OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

 

 

 

ARUN KUMAR ARYA, PRESIDENT

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant on 08/08/2014 through their uncle Sh. Arvind Kumar booking an e-ticket in sleeper class of train no. 12628/Karnataka Exp. for a journey on 02/10/2014 from New Delhi to Dharmavarm Jn. vide PNR no. 2261432064 for a sum of Rs. 1571.24. Initially, ticket position of the complainant showed status WL/17,18 and current status as RAC/71,72.

On 02/10/2014 complainant received a SMS on mobile no. 9968248743 that as 12628 dated 02/10/2014 F,-NDLS to DMM class P1-RC,S2,55 & P2-RC,S2,55, which can be understood that the final berth availability will be confirmed into the S2 coach after carrying out the physical check/verification by the duty TTE inside the coach and allotting the vacant berth to the complainant after departure of train New Delhi.

On 02/10/214, complainant boarded the train and occupied berth no. 55 in S2. It is further alleged that after departure of train from New Delhi station the complainant waited for TTE for confirmation of their other berth but no TTE turn-up into the coach/train for physical verification of tickets. Complainant had also tried to contact to train superintendent, who may be in the AC coaches for finding about the TTE but the AC coaches door/shutter was shut down and complainant was unable to walk through the closed shutter of AC coach. It is further alleged that he was very exhausted and was very tired and shared a single berth with their younger brother whole night due to non attending the coach by on duty TTE and confirming the availability of any seat/berth in the coach.

Complainant in the whole process were unduly made to go through a lot of mental torture and harassment. On 09/10/214, the complainant sent a legal notice to the OP but no reply has been received. Therefore, the complainant approach this Forum for the redressal of his grievance.

On the issue of territorial jurisdiction it is argued by the complainant that the OP has its office at Delhi only falling under the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The perusal of the file shows that the complainant has failed to place on record any document which shows that the cause of action or the ticket in question was issued from the office which is under the territorial jurisdiction i.e. Connaught Place. In other words neither the office of the OP nor the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.

On the issue of territorial jurisdiction, we are guided by the Hon’ble National   Commission in Revision Petition bearing No.575/18 was filed by the petitioner Sh. Prem Joshi against order of Hon’ble State Commission dated 1.11.2017 titled as Prem Joshi Vs. Jurasik Park Inn, in which the Hon’ble National Commission held as under on 1/3/2018:-

“In terms of Section 11 of the Consumer Protection Act, a complaint can be instituted inter-alia in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the cause of action only or in part arises.  The case of the complainant is that the ticket for visiting the amusement park was purchased by him online in his office in Karol Bagh and it is the District Forum at Tis Hazari has territorial jurisdiction over the mattes in which cause of action arises in Karol Bagh.  The cause of action is bundle of facts which a person will have to prove in order to succeed in the Lis. Therefore, in order to succeed in the consumer complaint, the complainant will necessarily have to prove the purchase of the ticket in entering amusement park situated at Sonepat.  Since the tickets was allegedly purchased at the office of the complainant situated in Karol Bagh, the Distict Forum having territorial jurisdiction over Karol Bagh area would have the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the consumer complaint”.

 

In the light of the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission titled as Prem Joshi Vs. Jurasik Part Inn in Revision Petition No.575/18 and the legal position discussed above, we hold that this District Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the present complaint. Let the complaint be returned to the complainant along with documents for presenting before the appropriate Forum in accordance with law.

Copy of   the order may  be  forwarded  to  the  complainant  free of cost as  statutorily required. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to Record Room.

Announced in open Forum on 30/01/2020

 

 

              (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                         PRESIDENT

 

            (NIPUR CHANDNA)    

   MEMBER