KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACADU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPEAL:208/2008 JUDGMENT DATED.3..10..2008 PRESENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT SMT.VALSALA SARANGADHARAN : MEMBER Station Master, Southern Railway, Angadippuram Railway Station, Angadipuram. : APPELLANT (By Adv: Sri. Ranganathan) V. 1. Munawar Ahammed, S/o Ibrahim, Sithara, Karulai, Nilambur, Malappuram. 2. Ramla Beevi. 3. Jaleela. 4. T.V.Ibrahim. 5. Anwar Ahammed. 6. Musafar Ahammed. 7. P.V.Subaida. 8. K.M.Ameer. 9. T.P.Ashraf. 10. K.M.Jaisal. 11. V.K.Hassan. 12. K.Jameel. 13. A.Nafeesa. 14. P.Mohammed Kutty. 15. K.S. Shanavas. 16. Hafis Ali. 17. C.H.Nafeesa. 18. T.K.Rabiya. 19. Rahman Sakeer. 20. Muhsina. 21. Nadima. 22. T.Jumalia. 23. Nesrin. 24. Zaina Jaleel. 25. Faizal. 26. Nazil. 27. M.Moideen Kunhi. 28. T.K.Sulaikha. 29. Musthafa. 30. Ayishabi. : RESPONDENTS 31. Mubhail. 32. Surayya. 33. Mumthaz. 34. Razeena. JUDGMENT JUSTICE SHRI.K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/Southern Railway that is under orders to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- each to the adults and Rs.500/- to the minor complainants as compensation. The case of the complainants is that they had gone for an international conference of the particular religious sect. They had also reserved tickets back to Shornur/Calicut railway station at Malappuram district. They had reserved berths and the return ticket was on 2..11..2005. The reservation was made 60 days in advance. The ticket was for journey starting on 30..12..2005 from Amritsar junction to Hazrath Nizamudeen and there from on 31..12..2005 from Nizamudeen to Shornur/Calicut by Mangala Express in S.1 2nd class sleeper coach. But it was found that the particular reservation was cancelled and the coach was replaced by G.1. coach with wooden seats. The compartment was jam packed and many of the complainants did not even get seats. They had to suffer a lot of inconveniences, mental strain etc. The complainants included ladies and children. A sum of Rs.4,50,000/- was claimed as compensation. 2. According to the version of the appellant it was found that the particular coach was unfit for running and hence a 2nd class coach was connected. Reservation chart was pasted on the coach. Refund was promised but the same was not availed. 3. The evidence adduced consisted of the proof affidavit by the 1st complainant and Exts.A1 series, the reservation slips. Counter affidavit was filed by the 3rd opposite party. 4. We find that the appellant has not adduced any evidence to establish that they were not having the sufficient spare coaches. The opposite parties/appellants is bound to make suitable arrangements for the return of passengers stranded at a far off place. We find that the amount of compensation awarded is just meagre. Hence no interference is called for. Appeal is dismissed in-limine. JUSTICE K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT VALSALA SARANGADHARAN : MEMBER VL.
......................JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU
......................SMT.VALSALA SARNGADHARAN | | 
