CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X
GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel)
New Delhi – 110 016
Case No.602/2006
SH. ASHISH RANJAN,
S/O SH. HARENDRA PRASAD SINHA,
R/O E-11-D, DDA FLAT, MUNIRKA,
NEW DELHI-110067
…………. COMPLAINANT
VS.
- OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT,
RESERVATION OFFICE OKHLA RAILWAY STATION,
NEW DELHI
- THE GENRAL MANAGER,
NORTHERN RAILWAY,
BARODA HOUSE,
NEW DELHI
- MINISTRY OF RAILWAY
UNION OF INDIA
NEW DELHI
…………..RESPONDENTS
Date of Order: 02.02.2016
O R D E R
A.S. Yadav – President
The case of complainant is that on 04.03.2006 he purchased ticket for self and parents from railway counter of Okhla Railway Station for going to Chennai by Rajdhani Express. The date of journey was 10.03.2006 and return journey from Chennai to New Delhi was 19.03.2006 by Tamil Nadu Express in 3 AC. All the details were filled by him in the reservation slip. In the reservation slip the day of return journey was clearly mentioned as 19.3.2006. The tickets for Rajdhani Express were confirmed but tickets for Tamil Nadu Express were RAC. On 18.03.2006 in order to get his reservation position, he went to Chennai station and there he saw date of journey was mentioned as 12.03.2006 instead of 19.03.2006 in the ticket. The matter was brought to notice of Station Manager of Chennai Railway Station but he has shown his inability to help him. Ultimately he had to purchase tatkal ticket and paid Rs.300/- for each ticket for three persons i.e. total amount of Rs.900/-.
It is further stated that after arrival in Delhi on 21.3.2006 he went to Okhla Railway Station and placed his grievances before OP-1. OP-1 after hearing complainant got angry but the passengers who were present there for purchasing ticket intervened and pressured OP-1 to verify his submission. OP-1 called one of his staff and directed to place the reservation slip dated 04.03.2006 and after some time the reservation slip was produced in which the date of returning journey was 19.03.2006. OP-1 told him to get back the refund from Chief Commercial Manger(Refund). On 21.03.2006 complainant applied for refund of the amount but even after expiry of six days he did not receive any amount from OP-1. He went to office of OP-1 number of times and every time he was assured that amount will be given soon to him and ultimately he received a sum of Rs.4,635/- on 03.07.2006. It is a clear cut case of deficiency on the part of OP-1 as he has suffered mental harassment and inconvenience due to negligence of OP-1. It is prayed that OP be directed to refund Rs.900/- paid under Tatkal facility and also to pay Rs.80,000/- for compensation.
OP-1 in reply has not disputed that due to the mistake of the booking clerk, the tickets for return journey were issued for 12.03.2006 instead of 19.03.2006. It is however stated by OP-1 that for purchasing tickets at the booking counters in the reservation offices, the applicants have to fill up a requisition form on which there are clear instructions to the passengers “check your ticket and balance amount before leaving the window” for the benefit of the passengers. The said instructions are also clearly and legibly displayed on the notice boards all over the said office including at the entrance of the booking counters. However, complainant purchased the tickets from the booking counter without verifying the details of the tickets. Had the complainant followed the instructions and checked his tickets at the time of their purchase as per the instructions, he would have pointed out the inadvertent and bonafide mistake and the same could have been rectified earlier. Complainant has also not taken reasonable care and caution as should have been taken by a prudent man and thus there can be no negligence fastened on OP-1 for the said acts of omission and commission by him. In view of the fact that complainant did not travel on the ticket on 12.03.2006 which due to an inadvertent and bonafide error had been issued to him for 12.03.2006 instead of 19.03.2006, OP-1 chose to refund the full ticket amount to complainant without deducting any charges as have to be paid on cancellation of the ticket. It was the duty of the complainant to check his ticket at the time of its issuance by the booking counter clerk. No liability for deficiency of service can be fastened upon OP-1 for the said acts of omission of complainant especially when full ticket amount has also been refunded to him by OP-1. It is prayed that complaint be dismissed.
We have heard Ld. Counsel for complaint and carefully perused the record.
So far as contention of OP that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint in terms of Section. 13, 15 and 26 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 is concerned, reference is placed on the case of Northern Railways & Anr. Vs Shalini Kapoor 111(2007) CPJ 78(NC) where Hon’ble National Commission held in para 7 as under:-
“7. First on the question of jurisdiction, we are clearly of the opinion that where the issue is of one of the deficiency in service, the Consumer protection Act comes into play irrespective of any of the Legislatures like “Railways Tribunal Act etc.”
Hence this Forum has the jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint.
The reservation slip placed on the record clearly shows date of return journey as 19.3.06. It is significant to note that in the reservation slip it is clearly mentioned “please check your ticket and balance amount before leaving the window”. Admittedly, complainant has not checked the ticket. He should have gone through tickets especially when the reservation in respect of return journey was RAC. Had he been careful he would have immediately noticed that the date of return journey has been wrongly mentioned as 12.3.06 instead of 19.3.06. The booking was done on 04.3.06 hence there was enough time for complainant to look at the tickets but he did bother to go through the same. Definitely there was lapse on the part of complainant as well. But that does not absolve the railway authorities. It was duty of the railway authorities to issue the ticket strictly in terms of the information furnished in the reservation slip. In this case there was definitely a lapse on the part of booking clerk as he has issued ticket for return journey for 12.3.06 instead of 19.3.06.
Complainant has admittedly received the entire amount in respect of return journey. So far as a sum of Rs.900/- has been paid by him for tatkal ticket, he is not entitled for the same because he has performed that journey and moreover he has not claimed for the same from railway authorities on 21.03.2006 and has claimed only for the amount of return journey and the same has been paid to him.
The only point for consideration is what compensation should be awarded to the complainant in view of the facts and circumstance of the case. We are of the view that interest of justice will suffice if complainant is paid a sum for Rs.5,000/- towards compensation and Rs.3,000/- for litigation expenses. If the amount is not paid within one month even complainant shall be entitled to interest @ 10% till the payment is made.
Let the order be complied with within one month of the receipt thereof. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.
Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.
(D.R. TAMTA) (A.S. YADAV)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
