DEBASIS BHATTACHARYA, PRESIDING MEMBER

               This appeal has been directed against order dated 19.11.2014 in C.C. No. 27/2013 passed by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Maldah (for short, District Forum). By the impugned order, the case has been allowed.  Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, the OP Nos. 1 to 4 thereof  have preferred this appeal.

              The case of the Complainant is that he booked one confirmed e-ticket in tatkal option through the OP No. 5 for travelling from New Delhi to Kishanganj in 12524 NDLS NJP SF Exp. train on 14.10.2012 vide PNR No. 2709727844. Before Boarding the train, he found that the said ticket is shown in waiting list in spite of the ticket being confirmed. Thus, he has suffered a lot of trouble in journey for such deficiency in service negligently. He suffered harassment and financial loss, even the ticket value has not been returned. Finding no other alternative, he arranged to return by airlines by paying Rs.9,992/- as additional expenses. Accordingly, he sent a notice to the OPs through his lawyer for claim etc. being aggrieved with the deficiency in service, but the refund was not made. Accordingly, the case

            On the other hand, the case of the OP Nos. 1 to 3 is that the ticket of the Complainant was from New Delhi (NSDL) to Kishangunj (KNE), which is within the authority and control of NF Railway and the said train does not touch any station of the Eastern Railway. So, the Complainant may file the case within the jurisdiction of Northern Railway and not within the jurisdiction of the Eastern Railway, for which the case is liable to be dismissed. Further, the Complainant procured e-ticket from the OP No. 5, an agent of the IRCTC and Zonal Railway has no role to play in it. So, the status of refund against the said PNR can only be furnished by the IRCTC and not by these OPs. Accordingly, the complaint be dismissed.

             It is to be considered if the impugned order suffers from any kind of anomaly so as to make an interference in this appeal.

Decision with reasons

              Ld. Advocate for the Appellants has submitted that NF Railway has not  been made a party in the case by the Complainant, for which the case suffers from non-joinder and/or mis-joinder of parties. If there is any fraud, it was done or committed by the unauthorized agent, namely, OP No.5. The PNR Detail Enquiry clearly shows the booking status as also status after charting as wait list. So, the Complainant will not get anything from these OPs.

             Ld. Advocate for the Respondent, however, has submitted that it has never been the contention of the OP   Nos. 1 to 3 that the ticket was not a genuine one and that it was not a confirmed ticket. Only after boarding the train, it was found that the same is not confirmed.  As the refund payment has not been made, the Complainant has been bound to file the case. This is a case of complete deficiency in service of the OPs. As such, he has to come by air from New Delhi to Kolkata by paying a charge of Rs.9,992/-.

             On perusal of the materials on record, it is found that there is nothing to interfere in the impugned order to refund Rs.1,524/-  by the OP Nos. 1 to 3 and  6 along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the case. But, the compensation of Rs.10,000/- against them is a double  jeopardy, which is struck off. Accordingly, the impugned order is modified. Appeal stands partly allowed.