Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/155/2015

Southern Railway, The General Manager - Complainant(s)

Versus

R. Raju - Opp.Party(s)

K. Kumaran

22 Mar 2022

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

 

BEFORE :       Hon’ble Thiru Justice R. SUBBIAH               PRESIDENT

Thiru S. KARUPPIAH                                       JUDICIAL MEMBER

                        

F.A.NO.155/2015

(Against order in CC.NO.58/2013 on the file of the DCDRC, Coimbatore)

 

      DATED THIS THE 22^nd DAY OF MARCH 2022

 

The General Manager

Southern Railway                                                                    K. Kumaran

Park Town                                                                              Counsel for

Chennai – 600 003                                                        Appellant / Opposite party

                                                         Vs.

 

1. R. Raju

No.1, 11^th Cross, 1^st Avenue

New Thillai Nagar, P.N.Pudur P.O

•  

2. M. Bagyalakshmi

W/o. R.Raju

No.1, 11^th Cross, 1^st Avenue

New Thillai Nagar, P.N.Pudur, P.OServed called absent

•  

 

          The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite parties praying for certain direction. The District Commission allowed the complaint. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt.26.7.2013 in CC.No.58/2013.

 

          This appeal coming before us for hearing finally today, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel appearing for the appellant and on perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Commission, this commission made the following order in the open court:

ORDER

 

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH,  PRESIDENT  (Open court)

1.       This appeal has been filed by the appellant/ opposite party as against the order dt.26.7.2013 in CC.No.58/2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Coimbatore, by directing the Appellant/ Opposite party  herein to pay a sum of Rs.10000/- to each of the complainants as compensation for mental agony alongwtih cost of Rs.1000/-.     

 

2.       The brief facts which are necessary to decide the appeal is as follows:

            The complainants are husband and wife.  They travelled from Coimbatore to Chennai on 15.6.2012 in Duronto Express and from Chennai to Coimbatore on 17.6.2012.  The travel in both ways was most inconvenient and problematic.  During the journey from Coimbatore to Chennai on 15.6.2012, coffee or tea was not served alongwith snacks and no desert was served alongwith the supper.  Similarly on the return journey from Chennai to Coimbatore on 17.6.2012, no beverages were served alongwith breakfast and pepper and pickle were not served alongwith lunch. There were cockroaches all over the compartment.  Therefore they have sent a letter dt.22.6.2012 to the opposite party explaining the difficulties faced by them during their journey and also highlighting the poor services rendered by the catering personnel, for which a belated bald and vague reply dt.20.9.2012 was received from the opposite party.  Subsequently there was an exchange of correspondence between them, with regard to the grievance of the complainant.  Since the complainants were made to face problems during the travel, they have come forward with the complaint by claiming compensation for the mental agony suffered by them and for the deficiency in service committed by the opposite party. 

 

3. The said case was resisted by the opposite party by filing a version   denying the allegations made by the complainant interalia contending that absolutely there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  It is incorrect to say that on 17.6.2012 during the travel snacks were not served to the complainant, and the size of trays used (taking into consideration the space available as dining table on the backrest of the seat in front) are not large enough to contain all snacks and tea/coffee service as well.   Moreover if tea/ coffee has been served alongwith the breakfast, it will become cold by the time the passengers consume the breakfast, since the passenger had travelled in the airconditioned coach.  Ice cream was served immediately after they were picked up from cell kitchen – erode.  Storing the ice creams in bottle coolers would have resulted in service of melted ice creams.  The bearer serving the food was always available in the coach. It is the complainant who did not approach the vendor of the coach complaining about the non-supply of coffee, tea or snacks.  If the complainant had brought this to the knowledge of the incharge of the catering, this problem would not have occurred.  But the complainant had chosen to send belated complaint.  All the coaches in the Duronto express are periodically maintained by the opposite party and there  was no possibility for cockroaches or insects in the compartment as claimed by the complainant.  The present complaint has been filed with the false averments without any substance, thus sought for dismissal of the complaint. 

 

4.       In order to prove their respective complaints proof affidavits were filed by both parties alongwith documents which were marked as Ex.A1 to A6 on the side of the complainant and Ex.B1 to B5 on the side of the opposite parties. 

 

5.       The District Commission after analysing the entire evidence had come to the conclusion that the opposite party had failed to produce menu which supports the case of the complainant that adequate quantity of food was not supplied to them during their journey.  The District Commission has further held that if dis-infection had been done properly, as alleged by the opposite party, there would not have been any possibility for the presence of the cockroaches in the compartment and there is no need for the complainants being a senior citizens to state falsely about the presence of the cockroaches.  Thus holding that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, allowed the complaint by directing the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs.10000/- to each of the complainants towards compensation alongwith cost.  Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party praying for dismissal of the complaint.   

 

6.       The Respondent/ complainant though served, remained absent before this commission.  We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the Appellant/ Opposite party, perused the materials placed on record and passed the following order:

 

7.       In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the point that has to be decided is

          1.  Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation based on the case projected by them?

 

8.       POINT NO.1

          The main allegations of the complainant are that the opposite party had not supplied tea/ coffee alongwith breakfast and snacks to the complainants during their journey in Duranto Express on 15.6.2012 and 17.6.2012 from Coimbatore to Chennai and from Chennai to Coimbatore respectively.  The next allegation is   that there were cockroaches all over the compartments during their journey on both days.

          For the above allegations of the complainant, the learned counsel for appellant/ opposite party would contend that due to the space constraint the coffee/ tea could not be supplied alongwith breakfast or snacks, but immediately after breakfast and snacks the said beverages were supplied.  It is also further submitted that if the complainants were really aggrieved about the non-supply of tea/ coffee, salt / pepper/ pickles they could have very well approached the vendor of the coach or the train manager who would have solved the problem then and there.

          Likewise for the allegation of the complainant that there were cockroaches all over the compartment, the learned counsel for the opposite party would contend that all the compartments are periodically maintained by the opposite party.  The pesticides and insect killer spray will be sprayed all over the compartments at frequent and regular intervals as prescribed by the Railway board.  Every Tuesday the Duranto express service is not available for public and these trains are maintained and serviced on that day.  Hence there is no possibility of cockroaches or insects as claimed by the complainant.  He would further contend that it is the duty of the public also to keep the train compartment clean and tidy and should be cautious that no edible items are spilled out in the compartment.   

 

9.       On evaluating the submissions and on perusal of the complaint, we are of the considered opinion that nowhere in the complaint the complainant had stated that even after approaching the vendors/ incharge of canteen or the bearer about the non supply of coffee/ tea etc, they have not provided the same.  But the complainants would simply contend that they have not supplied coffee/ tea after breakfast and snacks.  Likewise, the complainant had not produced any proof to show that there were cockroaches in the compartment.  If the complainant had found cockroaches in the compartment, they could have complained about the same to the TTE, who would be very well available in the compartment, or they could have made a complaint to the station incharge while they were alighting from the train, instead they wrote a complaint letter after five days.  The opposite party would contend that the complaint book was available in the train with the pantry manager and with the TTE during journey.  If they are really aggrieved, they could have approached the TTE and noted their complaint in the complaint book.  If they did so, the authorities also would be in a position to know the status from their staff viz. TTE who will know the real scenario.   Without doing all these things, the complainants are now trying to make us to believe some allegations without any supporting proof.  Further according to the opposite parties that there were no other complaints received from the other passengers in this regard.  Therefore, this commission has no other option except to come to the conclusion that the complainant has not proved their case with proper evidence.

 

          The learned District Commission had allowed the complaint on vague reasoning that “there is no need for the 1^st complainant, a senior citizen and his wife /2^nd complainant to falsely allege about the presence of cockroaches in the compartment” is unsustainable.  Moreover, for the unproved allegation about the non-supply of coffee/ tea and for the presence of cockroaches, awarding of Rs.10,000/- to each of the complainants as compensation seems to be not proportionate and is also dumping burden on the exchequer.  Hence we find no merit in the complaint, accordingly the order of the forum below is liable to be set aside.

 

10.     In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Coimbatore in CC.No.58/2013 dt.26.7.2013, and the complaint is dismissed.  There is no order as to cost throughout. 

 

 

 

          S. KARUPPIAH                                                                                                                       R. SUBBIAH

               MEMBER                                                                                                                            PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

INDEX : YES / NO

Rsh/d/rsj/ Open court