Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

204/2014

Rosary - Complainant(s)

Versus

Parveen Travels, By its Manager, - Opp.Party(s)

S.Natarajan

14 Nov 2016

ORDER

                                                            Complaint presented on:  24.10.2014

                                                                Order pronounced on:  14.11.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

MONDAY THE 14^th   DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016

 

C.C.NO.204 /2014

 

 

Mrs. Anitha Rosary,

W/o Stephen,

#:23 VII Street Nehru Colony,

Palavanthangal Chennai 114.

                                                                                        ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

 

Parveen Travels by its Manager,

“AB Towers”

#148, Perambur Barracks Road,

Purasawalkam, Chennai - 7

 

	...Opposite Party

Date of complaint                                     : 28.10.2014

Counsel for Complainant                          : S.Natarajan

Counsel for Opposite Party                     : M/s. G.Perumal

 

 

         

 

O R D E R

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant had booked four tickets in the ticketgoose.com to travel in Opposite Party bus on 13.08.2014 at 09.45 p.m, vide PNR #:TGE7P201269, from Chennai to RS Mangalam, with boarding point at Nnanganallur. The Complainant’s husband Stephen due to sudden work exigency could not join the family, cancelled his ticket. The remaining persons were given tickets as aforesaid. The Complainant with her aged mother in law and 2 young children reached the boarding point as mentioned in ticket sharply at 09.30 p.m on 13.08.2014. The Complainant and her family waited for the bus which did not come. The Complainant called to 04428193538 (given in the e-ticket as travels contact number) at 9:49 p.m to check bus status. The Opposite Party’s personnel at Egmore gave a  mobile number to call for the bus and know its status. This person directed the Complainant to contact 9952945555 which was done. The person at the other end asked the Complainant to wait, citing traffic snarls, at 9.50 p.m. The Complainant’s call to this number again at 10:16 and 10:20 was told that the bus was on its way and asked them to wait. Calls made again got an answer to call another number (8220908801) and she was said this is the driver’s number and asked her to contact him. The Complainant called 8220908801 at 10:37 p.m who informed that he was not on duty, which made matters tense. Again Complainant called 04428193538 (Egmore Office) at 10:38 PM & 10:39 p.m and none picked up the phone. After continuous calls to 9952945555 she got a response call from 9500050507. The Complainant called 9500050507, after much persuasion she was informed that this person also was not on duty, directing her to contact 04428193538 Egmore office. The Complainant called 04428193538 Egmore office at 10:50 p.m explained her great plight with 2 young children and an aged ailing mother in law. Sadly having waited at the boarding point from 9:30 p.m onwards there was no proper response and she was left stranded. Finally, the Complainant called to ticketgoose.com’s customer care (08880808080) at 10:52 p.m who informed that they will confirm status with operator and inform her. After making a call to Customer care 9500050507 she was given another number 90003278699 to contact. The Complainant called 9003278699 at 11.15 p.m, but there was no proper response. Meanwhile Complainant waited another 15 minutes, she did not find the bus. Finally Complainant called 9952945555 and said that they were still waiting at boarding point, the Opposite Party only asked her to confirm PNR number, which was done. The Complainant was told that this PNR number is not in their list and that the bus had crossed them an hour before and was proceeding towards Chingelpet. The Complainant was asked to come and meet Opposite Party at their Koyambedu office on the next day. The Complainant left stranded in the middle of the night with her 2 young children  and her aged mother in law, traveled by bus to Trichy and from Trichy, travelled to R.S.Mangalam, in a bus going to Rameswaram. The Complainant and her family lastly reached their native place next day 11.45 a.m. The Complainant and her family are yet to recover from the trauma caused by the abrupt ditching by Opposite Party and the endless agony and discomfort they were put to. Hence the Complainant issued legal notice on 27.08.2014 and failed to reply for the same. Hence the Complainant filed this Complaint to refund the cost of ticket amount of Rs.2,100/- and three tickets amount of Rs.1,800 travelled by them and also compensation for Deficiency in Service and mental agony with cost of the Complaint.

2. WRITTERN VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY  IN BRIEF:

          The Opposite Party admits that the Complainant booked ticket from Chennai to R.S.Mangalam. The Complainant and her mother in law and two children were not available at the boarding point at the time of the arrival of their bus. The bus driver searched and called for the Complainant and others. But the Complainant and others did not turn up and after some time the bus left that point. It is stated that the Complainant and others would have come lately after the said bus left that point. The various phone numbers and mobile numbers stated in the Complaint are not pertinent to the company of the Opposite Party. The Complainant and others arrived before the arrival of the said Bus at the boarding point; they would have boarded the said Bus. Having come to the boarding point very lately and the Complainant cannot blame the Opposite Party, for the mistake committed by the Complainant. The Opposite Party with at most care and sincere and effective steps has been taken to provide good comfortable and enjoyable travel in the said bus and there is no deficiency in service by the opposite party at any point of time.  A suitable reply has been sent along with D.D for Rs.4,200/- (Rs.2,100 for the ticket and Rs.2,100/- for the amount your client would have spend for their travel to their native place ) for the legal notice dated 27.08.2014, however the D.D has been returned by the Complainant. The amounts claimed in the Complaint not sustainable. It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Forum may be pleased to pass an order dismissing the above Complaint with cost.

3.POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

          2. Whether the complaint is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

 

 

4.POINT : 1

          It is an admitted fact that the Complainant booked ticket through ticket goose.com  to travel in the Opposite Party bus on 13.08.2014 night from Chennai to R.S.Mangalam  for herself, her mother –in law and her daughter for a consideration of Rs.2,100/- under Ex.A1 and at the time of booking itself the boarding point fixed at Nanganallur  and however they could not travel in the said bus and hence they travelled in another bus to Trichy and from Trichy to R.S.Mangalam and reached their native place on the next day.

          5. According to the Complainant the Opposite Party committed deficiency is that while they were waiting in the Nanganallur bus stop at 9.30 a.m the bus did not come and hence the Complainant contacted the Opposite Party travel company to their phone number 044.28193538 at 9.49 p.m to checkup the bus status and the Opposite Party personnel gave the mobile no.9952945555 to contact and though the Complainant contacted that mobile number , he in turn gave another  mobile no.8220908801 at 10.37 p.m and that person informed that  he was on duty and again the Complainant contacted  the Opposite Party office and there was no response and hence she contacted the earlier mobile number 9952945555 continuously and then she got a response call from 9500050507 and that person informed that he was also on duty and he directed to contact 044-28193538 office number and when she contacted at 10.50 p.m there was no proper response and then she contacted customer care and was directed by customer care  she contacted another 2 mobile number and finally the person from mobile number 9952945555 informed that the bus had crossed an hour before and he asked her to contact next day at Koyambedu office and therefore the Opposite Party bus failed to pick up the Complainant and  2 others as per Ex.A1 ticket the Opposite Party has committed Deficiency in Service.

          6. The Opposite Party replied that the bus reached and stopped at Nanganallur and at that time the Complainant and her family members not available at the boarding point even though the bus driver searched and called for the Complainant and others they did not turn up and after some time the bus left that point and the Complainant and others would have come late after their bus left that point and therefore the Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service.

          7. The Complainant specifically alleged several phone numbers in her Complaint and also in her Ex.A3 notice issued to the Opposite Party that she contacted all the numbers and there was no proper reply from any one and finally around 11.30 p.m only she was informed from the mobile number 9952945555 that the bus crossed one hour  before. The Opposite Party  stated in the written version that the various phone numbers and mobile numbers stated in the Complaint are not pertinent to the company of the Opposite Party. It means none of the numbers mentioned in the Complaint alleged to have contacted by the Complainant are not owned by the Opposite Party.

8. The Complainant case is that 044-28193538 is the Opposite Party company number. The Opposite Party admits that Ex.A1 is the ticket booked for the Complainant and her family members. The Opposite Party is the Parveen Travels. In Ex.A1, E.ticket below the name of Parveen Travels on the right top of the ticket the office number printed as 044-28193538. The Complainant contacted only that number first to enquire about the Opposite Party bus status at 9.49 p.m and he in turn provided the other mobile number and there after other mobile numbers referred in the Ex.A3 notice and in the Complaint. The Opposite Party on the whole denied that various phone numbers and mobile numbers referred in the Complaint  are not related to the Opposite Party company is wrong. Therefore we hold that through Ex.A1 and also pleading in the Complainant, the Complainant proved that she had contacted the Opposite Party’s office first and there after all other mobile numbers belongs to the Opposite Party Company only.  This circumstance established that Complainant reached Nangallur and was waiting at the pickup point and the bus driver did not stop the bus to pick them at that point alleged by the Complainant is accepted.

          9. The   Opposite Party filed Ex.B7 trip sheet to prove that the Complainant and others are not waiting at the pickup point at Nanganallur and hence the bus left that place. In Ex.B7 at page 1 the boarding point has been filled onward trip. Nowhere in the onward trip column, the Nangallur has been written as boarding point. If really the Complainant should have stopped the bus at Nanganallur, he could have very well mentioned Nanganallur below the column boarding point. Further in Ex.B7 at page 3 is the computer generated document. The seat number allotted to the Complainant are 5,6 and 7. Against those numbers in pen it is written as not travelled in Tamil.  This writing does not tally with the other names written in the same page like pillar, Guindy and Tambaram in Tamil. All the 3 names style of writing is in the same style of stroke and whereas against seat numbers 5,6 and 7  not travelled written in different style.  This document has been filed during middle of the oral arguments. Due to such differences as contended by the Complainant, the page 3 in Ex.B7 document the words “not travelled” written only later time and filed the  same before this Forum. Therefore Ex.B7 document at page 3 cannot be accepted for the reasons discussed above.

          10. The Opposite Party have not defended the case with clean hands and suppressed the facts own company phone numbers and therefore we hold that for the forgoing discussion stated supra, the Opposite Party  committed Deficiency in Service by not stopping the  bus at pick up point at Nanganallur.

 11.POINT :2      

         The Complainant and her mother- in-law and her daughter are ladies stranded in the middle of the road for not picking up at Nananallur stopping by the Opposite Party, caused metal agony to them is accepted. Further they have caught other buses to reach their native place with sufferings. Therefore for mental agony the Complainant is entitled for compensation. However, immediately after receipt of notice the Opposite Party sent the ticket charges of Rs.2,100/-  and another sum of Rs.2,100/- that they would have spent for their travel to their native place, totally a sum of Rs.4,200/- by way of D.D to the  Complainant. The said D.D was returned by the Complainant. However the Complainant claimed only a sum of Rs.1,800 towards their travel expenses to their native place that day.  Considering the circumstances stated above it would be appropriate to order to refund a sum of Rs.3,900/- (Rs.2,100/- for their ticket as per Ex.A1  and Rs.1,800/- spent for their travel to their native place) to the Complainant and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards compensation for mental agony besides a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Party is ordered to refund a sum of Rs.3,900/- (Rupees three thousand and nine hundred only) towards ticket charges to the Complainant  and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards compensation for  mental agony, besides a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses.

          The above amount shall be paid to the Complainant within 6 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry   9% interest till the date of payment.

Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 14^th day of November 2016.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 13.08.2014                   E – ticket

Ex.A2 dated 13.08.2014                   New ticket

Ex.A3 dated 27.08.2014                   Legal notice with ack due

Ex.A4 dated  13.08.2014                  Cancelled ticket

Ex.A5 dated  07.08.2014                  Refund info

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY:

Ex.B1 dated 13.08.2014                   Trip Sheet

Ex.B2 dated 13.08.2014                   Details of passengers travel

Ex.B3 dated NIL                     Boarding points of the Bus

Ex.B4 dated 09.10.2014                   Opposite Party’s Advocate reply

Ex.B5 dated 11.10.2014                   Acknowledgement

Ex.B6 dated NIL                      Letter from the Complainant for D.D returned

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT