Delhi

StateCommission

FA/13/35

RAILWAYS MANGER & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

R.S BHATNAGAR - Opp.Party(s)

27 May 2016

ORDER

 IN THE STATE COMMISSION

(Constituted under section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

Date of Decision: 27.05.2016

 

First Appeal No. 35/2013

 

        In the Matter of:

 

                1. The Divisional Railway Manager

          Office of the D.R.M. New Delhi

          Railway Station, New Delhi-110001

 

          2. The Chief Commercial Manager

          Office of the C.C.M. New Delhi

          Railway Station, New Delhi-110001                               …….Appellants

 

Shri. R.S. Bhatnagar, R/o C-12/27 Yamuna Vihar, Delhi                                             ……..Respondent

CORAM

Justice Veena Birbal, President

Salma Noor, Member

1.   Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the   judgment? 

2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

1.             In this appeal challenge is made to order dated 10.05.2012 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, M-Block, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi (in short ‘the District Forum’) in Complaint Case No. 185/09 whereby the District Forum has directed the appellant/OP as under:

 

        “We direct OP to pay the cost of II A/C Rs. 1,547/- as he had not availed/journey along with Air Ticket Rs. 9,580/- i.e. 11,127/- along with @ 6% interest till realization and we also award Rs. 25,000/- as mental agony/harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant, should be paid y OP.

 

2.             The aforesaid judgment is an ex-parte judgment.

3.             Considering the consequences of imposition of costs in condoning the delay of 150 days in filing the appeal as well as in setting aside the ex-parte judgment,     Ld. Counsel for the appellant while arguing on application for condonation of delay which has been disposed of vide separate order passed today, had stated that appellant/OP was not challenging the directions of District Forum whereby the costs of II AC i.e. Rs. 1,547/- as well as air ticket of Rs. 9580/- i.e. in all Rs. 11,127/- along with 6% interest till realization had been awarded.

4.             The only grievance of the appellant is that the compensation of Rs. 25,000/- awarded in favour of respondent/complainant towards mental agony and harassment is on higher side. It is submitted that when the Ld. District Forum has already awarded refund of II class AC ticket and also the cost of air ticket to the respondent/complainant, in that event the separate order for grant of compensation was not justified.        

5.             The respondent/complainant has submitted that he is a senior citizen. It is submitted that no doubt his ticket was upgraded by the appellant/OP from second class AC to first class AC but he was made to get down from the train at midnight at Pataudi Railway Station to change the seat in first class AC. The train had stopped only for 5 minutes. He has submitted that he was pressurized to change the seat.

6.             On the other hand, the stand of the appellant/OP is that there was no need for getting down from the train as the train in which respondent/complainant was travelling was having interconnected compatment. Respondent/complainant has denied the same.

7.             No substantial proof is filed by the appellant before this Commission about compartments being interconnected The appellant/OP is ex-parte before the Ld. District Forum. Even written statement was not filed on its behalf.

8.             In any event, considering the totality of facts and circumstances, we reduce the compensation amount from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 10,000/-. The impugned order stands modified to the extent of award of compensation only. The other direction about the refund of II class ticket/air ticket with interest is upheld.

        Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

        File be consigned to record room.

(Justice Veena Birbal)

President

 

 

(Salma Noor)

Member