Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/99

Vaneet Monga - Complainant(s)

Versus

Red Bus India - Opp.Party(s)

Harpreet Singh Chauhan

18 Nov 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

C.C. No. :                    99 of 2019

Date of Institution:       09.04.2019

Date of Decision :        18.11.2019

 

Vaneet Monga son of Vinod Monga resident of Rose Enclave, Faridkot, District Faridkot.

...Complainant

Versus

1. Red Bus India, Ibibo Group Pvt. Limited. Indiqube Leela Galleria, 5^th Floor, No.#23, Old Airport Road, HAL 2^nd Stage, Kodihalli Village, Varthur Hobli, Ward No. 74, Bengaluru-560008 through its Authorized Signatory.
2. Jujhar Constructions and Travel Private Limited, Backside Bus Stnad, Near PRTC Workshop, Ludhiana-141001 through its Authorized Signatory.

....Opposite Parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum:     Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

Smt. Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present:      Sh Harpreet Singh Chauhan, Ld Counsel for complainant,    

                  Sh Hardeep Singh, Ld Counsel for OP-2,

                  OP-1 Exparte.

* * * * * * * * * *

cc no.-99 of 2019

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                              Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Ops for deficiency in service and for seeking directions to them to refund the bus fare amount of Rs.475/- and for further directing them to  pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment besides litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-.

2                                         Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that on 6.04.2019, complainant got booked a bus ticket bearing no.TN5582255614 for travelling from Chandigarh to Kotkapura from OP-1 through online process and paid Rs.475/-through net banking and seat no.22 was allotted to him. OP-1 provides bus services to public and it has tie up with OP-2. As per booking, bus of OP-2 was to depart at 12.00 noon on 6.04.2019 from ISBT 43, Chandigarh and complainant reached there 15 minutes prior to departure and also reported his arrival to conductor of OP-2, but conductor told him that seat booked by complainant has been allotted to someone else, but he assured to arrange seat in adjustment within half an hour and asked him to board the bus. But, complainant did not get seat in said bus and he immediately reported the matter regarding non receiving the allotted seat to him to OP-1. It is submitted that bus was fully stuffed and about 12 persons were sitting on

cc no.-99 of 2019

stool in the aisle of 2+2 seating and about 15-20 persons were standing and 25 persons were more than the seats available in the bus, due to which air conditioner installed in bus was not working properly and there was no source of fresh air. Even after passing of half an hour, no seat was provided to complainant. On reaching Ludhiana, some seats became vacant and complainant requested conductor to adjust him on any one of seat that became vacant, but he showed his inability to adjust the complainant saying that seats which have got vacant have already been booked and cannot be provided to him. Said conductor behaved very rudely with complainant and then, complainant requested him to refund his charges, but OP-2 did not do anything needful. It is submitted that seat already got booked by complainant was illegally allotted by OP-2 to some other person and even on making complaint to OP-1, OP-2 neither arranged any seat for him nor refunded his fare charges. Despite repeated requests, Ops paid no heed to genuine requests of complainant. All this amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice. Act of OPs in not providing him booked seat and in not refunding the amount of ticket charges, amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice and it has caused huge harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses besides the main relief. Hence, the instant complaint.

3                                             The Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 22.04.2019,

cc no.-99 of 2019

complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                          Notice containing copy of complaint and relevant documents was issued to OP-1, but same has not been received back undelivered. Acknowledgment might have been lost in transit. Case has been called out many times but despite repeated calls, nobody appeared in the Forum on behalf of OP-1 either in person or through counsel on the date fixed, therefore, OP-1 was proceeded against ex parte vide order dt 18.06.2019.   

 5                                                       On receipt of the notice, OP-2 filed reply through counsel wherein asserted that complaint filed by complainant is false and frivolous and is based on baseless allegations. They have denied all the allegations being wrong and incorrect and asserted that present complaint is not maintainable against the answering OP and there is no deficiency in service on their part. complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and has concealed the material facts from this Forum that he did not reach at designated point on 6.04.2019 at stipulated time and even did not informed them regarding his late coming in advance on phone numbers mentioned on ticket. However, it is admitted by OP-2 that complainant got booked seat from them in bus for travelling from Chandigarh to Kotkapura and when complainant did not come till 12.00 p.m., their conductor allotted the seat to another passenger. Complainant

cc no.-99 of 2019

boarded the bus from Red Light of Phase – 3 Mohali and conductor provided the seat to him, but complainant pressurized him to refund the amount of Rs.475/-by way of false complaint. Further averred that as per Clause 13 sub clause 2 of terms and conditions of OP-1, it was the responsibility of complainant to reach the designated boarding point reasonably in advance before departure time, but complainant himself did not reach the designated boarding point in time and also did not intimate them regarding his late arrival. All the other allegations levelled by complainant are also denied being wrong and incorrect. On merits also, OP-2 has denied all the allegations of complainant being incorrect and reiterated the same pleadings as taken in preliminary objections and further averred that there is no deficiency in service on their part and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

6                                                Parties were given proper opportunities to produce evidence to prove their respective case. Ld counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-3 and documents Ex C-1 to C-2 and then, closed the evidence.

7                                                         To controvert the allegations of complainant, ld counsel for OP-2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Jaswinder Singh Ex OP-2/1, documents Ex OP-2/2 to Ex OP-2/3 and then, closed the same on behalf of OP-2.

 

cc no.-99 of 2019

8                                              Ld Counsel for complainant vehementally argued that on 6.04.2019, complainant got booked a bus ticket for travelling from Chandigarh to Kotkapura from OP-1 through online process and seat no.22 was allotted to him. Bus of OP-2 was to depart at 12.00 noon on 6.04.2019 from ISBT 43, Chandigarh and complainant reached there 15 minutes prior to departure and also reported his arrival to conductor, who told him that seat booked by complainant has been allotted to someone else and assured to arrange seat for him within half an hour and asked him to board the bus. But, complainant did not get seat in said bus and it was fully stuffed. About 12 persons were sitting on stool in the aisle of 2+2 seating and about 15-20 persons were standing. 25 persons were more than the seats available in the bus, due to which air conditioner was also not working properly. There was no source of fresh air. No seat was provided to him. On reaching Ludhiana, some seats became vacant and complainant requested conductor to adjust him on any one of seat that became vacant, but he did not cooperate with him and said that vacant seats have already been booked and cannot be provided to him. Said conductor behaved very rudely with complainant and then, complainant requested him to refund his charges, but OP-2 did not do anything needful. It is further submitted  that seat already got booked by complainant was illegally allotted to some other person and even on making complaint to OP-1, OP-2 neither arranged any seat for him nor refunded his fare

 cc no.-99 of 2019

charges. All this amounts to deficiency in service. He has prayed for accepting the present complaint.   

9                                            Ld counsel for OP-2 argued that there is no fault on their part and asserted that complainant did not reach at designated point on 6.04.2019 at stipulated time and also did not inform them regarding his late coming. Though it is admitted that complainant got booked seat in their bus for travelling from Chandigarh to Kotkapura and when he did not come till 12.00 p.m., his seat was allotted to another passenger. Complainant boarded the bus from Red Light of Phase–3 Mohali and conductor provided the seat to him, but he pressurized conductor to refund the amount of Rs.475/-. Moreover, as per terms and conditions of OP-1, it was the responsibility of complainant to reach the designated boarding point reasonably in advance before departure time, but complainant himself did not reach the designated boarding point in time and also did not intimate them regarding his late arrival. All the allegations of complainant are denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint with costs is made.

10                                        From the careful perusal of record and after going through evidence and documents produced on file by complainant as well as OPs, it is observed that case of complainant is that through online process, he got booked a seat from OP-1 for travelling from Chandigarh to Kotkapura in the bus of OP-2 and paid ticket charges

cc no.-99 of 2019

through net banking. Seat no.22 was allotted to him and he reached the boarding place 15 minutes prior to departure of bus, but conductor of OP-2 told him that seat booked by complainant has been allotted to some other person and assured to adjust the complainant within half an hour, but did not provide him any seat. On reaching Ludhiana some seats became vacant and then, complainant requested conductor to adjust him on one of the seat got vacant, but he refused to provide him seat saying vacant seats have already booked by some people. As per complainant, Volvo bus was fully occupied and it carried more passengers than its seating capacity due to many persons were travelling in standing position. Moreover, due to over stuffing of the bus, its air conditioner was not working properly and it was not properly cooled. Grievance of complainant is that he had to undertake his journey from Chandigarh to Kotkapura by standing though he got booked his seat in said bus much in advance and seat no. 22 was allotted to him, which is clearly visible by bare perusal of ticket Ex C-1. On the contrary, Ops have nothing to place on record to prove their pleadings. It is admitted that complainant got booked seat in the bus of OP-2 from OP-1 and there is no denial to the fact that seat no.22 allotted to complainant was not provided to him for undertaking journey and he had to travel without seat.

11                                            To prove his grievance, he has relied upon document Ex C-1 i.e copy of Red Bus Ticket bearing no.TN5582255614 that clears his pleading that  complainant got booked seat on 6.04.2019 for

cc no.-99 of 2019

travelling from Chandigarh to Kotkapura and paid Rs.475/-through online process and seat number 22 was allotted to him. E-Mail sent by OP-1 to complainant on 7.04.2019 in response to complaint made by complainant to them regarding rude behaviour and deficiency in service in not providing seat to complainant, throws light on the fact that OP-1 has itself admitted in it that seat was not allotted to complainant and he has regretted for non availability of seat and inconvenience suffered by complainant. Through his affidavit Ex C-3, complainant has reiterated his grievance and prayed for imparting justice to him. Complainant has produced sufficient and cogent evidence that proves the fact that there is trade mal practice on the part of OPs in not providing booked seat to complainant. Though complainant got booked seat for himself, OPs intentionally provided the seat no.22 got booked by complainant to someone else, who did not book that seat. There is no doubt that complainant has suffered huge harassment by doing his journey in standing position. All this amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs and has much caused harassment to him. on the contrary, OPs having nothing on record to contradict the allegations of complainant and have themselves admitted in written statement that seat was not provided to complainant.

12                                                 From the above discussion and keeping in view the evidence produced by parties, this Forum is of considered opinion that there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs in not giving

cc no.-99 of 2019

allotted seat to  complainant though he got booked his ticket for travelling in the bus of OPs in much advance. Accordingly, complaint in hand is hereby allowed with direction to OPs to pay Rs.10,000/-to complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by his while travelling in the bus of OPs and OPs are further directed to pay Rs.3,000/-to complainant on account of litigation expenses incurred by him. Compliance of this order be made within one month of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be further entitled for interest at the rate of 9% on award amount from the date of this order till final realization and shall also be entitled to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to the record room. 

Announced in Open Forum

Dated: 18.11.2019

(Param Pal Kaur)                  (Ajit Aggarwal)  

                                       Member                               President