Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/21/242

Jaspal Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

North-East Railway - Opp.Party(s)

Rakesh Sharma Adv.

10 Feb 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No:242 dated 30.04.2021.                                                         Date of decision: 10.02.2023.

 

Jaspal Singh son of Rajinder Singh, resident of Near Gurudwara AmlaTola, Katihar Bihar, at present FAC, 129, Sunder Nagar, Near SBI Bank, Ludhiana.                                                                                .…Complainant

                                                Versus

1. The Station Superintendent North-East Railway, Railway Station, Katihar, Bihar.
2. The Chief Claim Officer, NDCR Bldg. S.E. Road, Railway Station, New Delhi. 
3. Divisional Railway Manager, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur.
4. Station Superintendent, Northern Railway, Railway Station, Ludhiana.

                                                                                      ....Opposite parties 

Complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act.

QUORUM:

SH. SANJEEV BATRA, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

MS. MONIKA BHAGAT, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Sh. Rakesh Sharma, Advocate.

For OP1 and OP2          :         Exparte.

For OP3 and OP4          :         Sh. Kamaljeet Sharma, Advocate.

 

ORDER

PER SANJEEV BATRA, PRESIDENT

1.                In brief, the facts of the case are that the complainant is engaged in business of hosiery goods having address at Katihar and Ludhiana. He used to visit both cities on different occasions for business and family purposes. On 06.07.2019, the complainant booked 5 seats in ‘Tatkal Quota’ in train No.15707 namely Amritsar Katihar Express for journey on 07.07.2019 vide PNR No.6730409596 in AC Coach RAC-5 (one seat) and PNR No.6131515545 in AC Coach AC 2 (Four seats) from Katihar to Ludhiana and he started his journey along with his family from Katihar on the said date as per seats allotted by department of Railway. The complainant stated that when the train reached near Lucknow, then the A.C. of the said bogies stopped working and even no drinking water was available with concerned employees. Due to which he and other co-passenger faced problems and they complained to railway staff to remove the technical fault on which ticket collector Dilip Kumar Sharma gave in writing about deficiency of opposite parties but they could not remove the technical fault. Even assurance for refund of amount was given in writing. On reaching Ludhiana, the complainant requested opposite parties to refund the ticket amount as per rules of Railway Department but till date they have not refunded single penny to the complainant for which the complainant has been running pillar to post. Thus, the opposite parties are negligent and deficient in providing service to the complainant which has caused mental tension and physical harassment to the complainant. The complainant served a legal notice dated 26.02.2021 through counsel Sh. Rakesh Sharma, Advocate posted on 01.03.2021 but to no effect. Hence this complaint, whereby the complainant has sought direction to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.14,625/- along with interest @24% per annum along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- and legal charges of Rs.5100/-. 

2.                Upon notice, initially Sh. Kamaljeet Sharma, Advocate appeared and filed power of attorney on behalf of opposite party No.1 to 4. on 07.12.2021, Sh. Kamajeet Sharma, Advocate suffered statement that he has no instruction to appear on behalf of OP3 and OP4 and his presence be marked on behalf of OP1 and OP2 only. However, Ms. Vijay Sharma, Advocate filed memo of appearance on behalf of OP3 and OP4 on 07.12.2021 and case was fixed for filing regular power of attorney and written statement on behalf of OP3 and OP4. Later on, Sh. Kamaljeet Sharma, Advocate further suffered statement on 06.01.2022 for correction of interim order on the ground that he has wrongly mentioned OP1 and OP2 in his statement dated 07.12.2021 whereas he is representing OP3 and OP4 and has filed written statement on OP3 and OP4. Accordingly, vide order dated 06.01.2022, presence of Sh. Kamaljeet Sharma, Advocate was ordered to be marked on behalf of OP3 and OP4 only and as none turned up for OP1 and OP2, as such, they were proceeded against exparte.

3.                In their written statement, opposite party No.3 and 4 took preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable and denied deficiency of service on their part. Opposite party No.3 and 4 alleged that the complainant has not applied for the refund of the ticket amount with them within stipulated time period and has approached for refund at Ludhiana Railway after five days which was not permissible for refund. The complainant has to apply for refund of the railway ticket within 20 hours of train arrival of the destination for which the complainant has failed to do so and is not entitled for any refund of claimed amount from them.

                   On merits, opposite party No.3 and 4 alleged that as per Railway rules mentioned in Railway Time Table that, “In case of failure, difference between the far of 2-Tier AC and Sleeper Cass (Mai/Express) for the distance the AC was not working payable to the passenger within 20m hours of the train arrival at the destination station after producing the printed certificate from TTE along with the journey ticket.” The complainant reached his destination at Ludhiana Railway Station on 09.07.2019 at 21.18 hours whereas according to the complaint dated 13.07.2019, the complainant approached for refund at Ludhiana Railway Station after five days which was not refunded.  Opposite party No.3 and 4 denied having any deficiency in service on their part  and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.                In support of his claim, the complainant tendered his affidavit Ex. CA in which he reiterated the allegations and the claim of compensation as stated in the complaint. The complainant also tendered documents Ex. C1 and EX. C2 are the copies of railway tickets, Ex. C3 is the writing of TTE Dalip Kumar Sharma dated 09.07.2019, Ex. C4 is the copy of compliant dated 13.07.2019, Ex. C5 is the legal notice dated 26.02.2021, Ex. C6 to Ex. C9 are the postal receipts and closed the evidence.

5.                On the other hand, the counsel for opposite party No.3 and 4 tendered affidavit Ex. RA of Sh. Chetan Taneja, Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Northern Railway, Firozpur along with document Ex. R1 copy of  Railway rule regarding refund of tickets and closed the evidence.                                                                                   

6.                We have heard the arguments of the counsel for the parties and also gone through the complaint, rejoinder, affidavit and annexed documents and written reply along with affidavit and documents produced on record by both the parties.

7.                Undisputedly, on 07.07.2019, the complainant along with his family members boarded a train No.15707 Amritsar-Katihar Express from Katihar Railway Station for onward journey to Ludhiana. During transit, when the train was nearing Lucknow, AC of the said bogies in which the complainant and his family were travelling stopped working and the complainant as well as other co-passengers faced difficulty in travel. During transit, the matter was brought into notice of Ticket Collector Dilip Kumar Sharma who issued a certificate Ex. C3 in this regard. The ordeal of the complainant persisted till culmination of his journey till Ludhiana. The claim Ex. C4 was lodged as on 13.07.2019 for refund of ticket amount but the opposite parties did not respond. Even legal notice Ex. C5 failed to yield desired results. The counsel for opposite party No.3 and 4 drawn the attention of this Commission towards the relevant applicable rules and procedure as depicted in Ex. R1 which reads as under:-

Refund on Tickets arising out of other circumstances

Reason for claiming refund	Procedure for refund	Time limit for claiming refund	Amount payable to you
Failure of AC	Produce a printed certificate from the Traveling Ticket Examiner, along with your journey ticket.	Within 20 hrs. of the train’s arrival at the destination station.	AC 1 Class- Difference between AC 1 Class and First Class fare (Mail/Exp) for the distance AC was not working. AC 2 Tier/3tier sleeper- Difference between these classes and sleeper class  fare (Mail/Exp) for the distance AC was not working. AC Chair Car- difference between this and Second Class fare (Mail/Exp) for the distance AC was not working.

 

He further contended that there is delay of 5 days in lodging the FIR and as such, complainant is not entitled to any refund or compensation.

8.                It may be noticed that despite the existence of aforesaid procedure, time limit etc., the opposite parties did not settle the claim. It is also not the case that TTE has made the complainant aware of the procedure of lodging of claim for refund. Even it has not been printed on the journey or reservation ticket Ex. C1 and Ex. C2. Further the complainant has right to be informed as per Section 2(9) of the Consumer Protection Act about the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard ad price of goods, products or services, as the case may be, so as to protect the consumer against unfair trade practice;

Therefore, non-rectification of the defect in time and non-settlement of claim by the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service on their part. As such, the complainant is entitled to refund the amount of ticket and compensation. As the complainant has claimed the refund of entire amount of purchased tickets of Rs.14,625/- but since the complainant had travelled the journey up to Lucknow so this refund amount is rounded off to Rs.10,000/- along with composite cost of Rs.10,000/-.

9.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with direction to the opposite parties to refund the rounded off amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order failing which the complainant shall be held entitled for interest @8% per annum from the date of order till actual payment. The opposite parties shall pay composite costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Liability of the opposite parties is held joint and several. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

10.              Due to huge pendency of cases, the complaint could not be decided within statutory period.

 

(Monika Bhagat)          (Jaswinder Singh)                      (Sanjeev Batra)                          Member                            Member                                       President         

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:10.02.2023.

Gobind Ram.

 

 

Jaspal Singh Vs The Station Superintendent         North-East Rail.     CC/21/242

Present:       Sh. Rakesh Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

                   OP1 and OP2 exparte.

                   Sh. Kamaljeet Sharma, Advocate for OP3 and OP4.

 

                   Learned counsel for OP3 and OP4 closed evidence after tendering affidavit Ex. RA along with document Ex. R1.

                   Arguments heard. Vide separate detailed order of today, the complaint is partly allowed with direction to the opposite parties to refund the rounded off amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order failing which the complainant shall be held entitled for interest @8% per annum from the date of order till actual payment. The opposite parties shall pay composite costs of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Liability of the opposite parties is held joint and several. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

(Monika Bhagat)          (Jaswinder Singh)                      (Sanjeev Batra)                       Member                     Member                                       President         

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:10.02.2023.

Gobind Ram.