Date of Filing:16-11-2017
Date of Order: 14-10-2019
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD
P r e s e n t
HON’BLE Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B. PRESIDENT
HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER
Monday, the 14th day of October, 2019
C.C.No.481 /2017
Between
Chakali Srikanth S/o.Sanjeeva
Age : 32 years, Occ: Advocate,
R/o.H.No.1-71/1, Chimaldari Village,
Nawabpet Post, Mominpet Mandal,
Vikarabad dist - 50111
……Complainant
And
The General Manager,
Secunderabad Division,
South Central Railway,
Sanchalan Bhavan,
Secunderabad, Telangana – 500071 ….Opposite Party
Counsel for the complainant : Party in person
Counsel for the opposite Party : Ms. Vijaya Sagi
O R D E R
(By Sri P. Vijender, B.Sc., LL.B., President on behalf of the bench)
This complaint has been preferred under Section 12 of C.P. Act 1986 alleging that not allowing the complainant to travel despite having reservation in the train and showing the image of reservation ticket to the TTE concerned amounts to deficiency of service hence a direction to opposite party to pay a compensation for causing mental agony, inconvenience and loss of professional reputation etc.
- The complaint case in brief is that he is an advocate by profession. On 7-10-2017 the complainant’s client booked a ticket for the complainant to travel from Secunderabad to Machilipatnam by train No.12750 with travel date as 12-10-2017. Booking of the said ticket was at booking counter Khanisandra, Main road, Bangalore. On the schedule date of travel the complainant boarded the train at Secunderabad to go to Machilipatnam to attend the case of his client who booked the ticket for him for travel from Secunderabad to Machilipatnam. While he was in the train Mr.Praveen Kumar ticket collector was checking the tickets with the passengers. When it came to the turn of the complainant to show his ticket the complainant had shown PNR number of the ticket its status his valid original identity card, Aadhar card and Whatsapp image of train ticket. The ticket collector Mr.Praveen Kumar told that image of the original train ticket is not a valid one and he want to check PRS ticket alone. The complainant explained to the ticket collector that his client due to family problems could not send the original ticket to him and since he is professionally busy he could not take another ticket and requested to allow him to travel as scheduled. But the ticket collector Mr.Praveen Kumar insisted on the complainant either pay fine or else to get down from the train. The complainant argued with the ticket collector that as per the rule he had a reservation and chart also discloses the fact that the ticket was reserved in his name but it was not agreed by the ticket collector. Finally the ticket collector collected fine amount of Rs.285/- and issued a receipt invoice No.721139.
The complainant’s client also purchased a ticket for his travel from Yelhanaka Junction to Machilipatnam by train No.17212 with travel date as 12-10-2017 but the Railway authorities cancelled the said train for the reason of monsoon changes. When the ticket collector demanded the complainant to pay penalty complainant was having only Rs.300/- in his pocket. On the date of travel the wash rooms in the train were not clean. Hence the complainant could not fresh up in the train and suffered a lot. He reached Machilipatnam Court at late hours on 13-10-2017 as a result he lost his professional name as he could not attend the court and his client could not travel on account of cancellation of train in which he had reserved ticket. The complainant suffered mental stress and it affected his professional work as on account of this episode he could not concentrate on work. The opposite party supposed to give proper service to its customers while they were on travel but failed in its duty. The concerned ticket collector was aware that PNR number is nothing but primary ticket and there was reservation in the name of the complainant as per the reservation chart and identity of the complainant was revealed and despite that the complainant was asked to either to get down or pay penalty which is not excepted of him. Thus there was deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties . Hence the present complaint to award a total compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- and interest there on to the complainant .
- Opposite party filed written version and its stand is the present complaint is not maintainable for non-joinder of Union of India because the amount collected for the sale of the ticket was remitted to the Union of India . The opposite party is not a legal entity on its own. It is only representative of Union of India. The complainant has not issued any legal notice to the opposite party which is mandatory before filing of the complaint under Section 80C of the CPC and in the absence of it the complaint is not maintainable.
Even according to the complainant his client who purchased the railway reservation ticket from him at Bangalore for travel to the complainant from Secunderabad to Machilipatnam was not sent to him. Since the complainant was not having original ticket with him he was not rightly allowed to travel in the train. As per the extant rule the passenger had to carry the original journey ticket and show it to the TTE for verification whenever demanded. The explanation given by TTE to the complainant as self explanatory. The WhatsApp image of the ticket is not the original ticket hence TTE rightly collected the charges as per the rules and he discharged his official duty as prescribed under Rule. The complainant is not a consumer because he is only beneficiary as the ticket was purchased by his client and the consumer is only the purchaser of the ticket but not the user of it. As per the railway passenger (Cancellation of ticket and refund of fare rules 1998) if the passenger who has paid excess charges in the train on account of his confirmed or RAC ticket being lost, misplaced, torn or mutilated makes an application to a railway Administration for grant of refund of charges paid in the train, the Chief Commercial Manager of the Administration after due enquiry grant refund of the charges of ticket realized in the train after retaining the cancellation charges. The complainant instead of seeking refund of the amount collected from him by the Ticket collector approached this Forum with present complaint. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the Railways to the complainant. The claim of the complainant that he suffered mentally, professionally and physically and entitled for compensation on these grounds is false and not tenable. Hence complaint is liable to be dismissed.
In the enquiry the complainant has got filed his evidence affidavit reiterating the substance of the complaint and to support the same got exhibited Xerox copies of Train tickets and reservation form. Similarly for the Opposite Party evidence affidavit of its Deputy Chief Commercial Manager, South Central Railway at Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad is got filed and substance of the same is in line with the defence taken in the written version . For the opposite party the copy of refund rules provisions is got filed. Complainant filed written arguments
On a consideration of material placed by both the parties the following points have emerged for consideration .
- Whether the complainant could make out a case of deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation claimed under the various heads ?
- To what relief?
Point No.1: It is not in dispute that a reservation /journey ticket was purchased by complainant’s client at Bangalore for travel of the complainant from Secunderabad to Machilipatnam on 12-10-2017 by train No.12750. It is a fact that original reservation /journey ticket was not handed over to the complainant by his client and when the complainant boarded the train as per the schedule he was having only whatsapp image of the reservation /journey ticket as such he could not produce the original ticket to the ticket collector at the time of checking in the train. The ticket collector seems to have not satisfied with the whatsapp image of the reservation /journey ticket and asked the complainant either to pay the charges or get down from the train since the complainant was not having the original reservation /journey ticket. The opposite party has not denied the factum of showing the complainant name and other particulars with PNR number in the reservation chart. It is also not the case of the opposite party that the ticket collector was not having reservation chart when he demanded the complainant to show the original ticket.
In the light of these facts and circumstances now it is to be seen whether the insistence on the part of the ticket collector with the complainant either to show original reservation /journey ticket or pay penalty or get down from the train amounts to deficiency of service or not. It is not in dispute that the complainant is a consumer because a reservation /journey ticket was purchased in his name by his client to travel from Secunderabad to Machilipatnam by Train No.12750 on12-10-2017. What is deficiency of service is defined under Section 2 (g) and it reads as under:-
“deficiency” means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under nay law for the time being in force or has been undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service.
Similarly service is defined under Section 2 (o) C.P of Act and it reads as under:-
“service” means service of any description which is made available to potential, [users and includes, but not limited to, the provision of] facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, [housing, construction] entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news of other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service:”
It is for the complainant to establish that there was any fault, imperfection short coming or inadequacy nature and manner of performance of the duties by the ticket collector in the instant case. A demand by the TTE with the passengers while on journey to produce original reservation /journey ticket is part of his job. Failure to accept whatsApp image of reservation /journey ticket does not amounts to deficiency of service. It is for the complainant to substantiate as to under what provision of law or regulation the railway TTE in train is obliged to accept the whatsApp image of reservation /journey ticket as original ticket . In the absence of such a rule or regulation the ticket collector is justified in asking the complainant to produce the original reservation /journey ticket or to pay the cost of the ticket to continue the journey.
It is pertinent to bear in mind that when there is no valid ticket with the passenger while on the train the TTE is empowered to impose penalty apart from collecting the ticket charges for their journey. In the instant case TTE did not impose any penalty on the complainant because he was quite aware that a reservation /journey ticket was purchased in the name of the complainant for that reason he collected only admissible charges for travel from Secunderabad to Machilipatnam and issued a invoice of ticket value. Thus the TTE acted within his prescribed limits and collecting of actual fare for the travel does not amounts to deficiency of service as alleged by the complainant .
The complainant made an attempt by saying that the washrooms were not clean and he could not wash of his face and was delayed in attending the Court because of this episode. It is not case of the complainant that the train delayed at destination and for that reason he could not attend Machilipatnam Court. If there was delay for any reason the complainant can say that because of delayed arrival of train he could not attend the case at right time. So attempt of the complainant to say that he suffered professionally also is not correct. Absolutely there is no deficiency of service on the part of the TTE as he acted within his limits. Hence the point is answered against the complainant.
Point No.2: In view of the above findings complainant is not entitled for any amount as compensation.
Point No.3: In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Dictated to steno, transcribed and typed by her, pronounced by us on this the 14th day of October , 2019
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Exs. filed on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A1- Journey cum reservation ticket on 12-10-2017
Ex.A2- fine receipt invoice No.721139dated 12-10-2017
Ex.A3-cancelled ticket dt.12-10-2017
Exs. filed on behalf of the Opposite party
Ex.B1- copy of refund rules provisions
MEMBER PRESIDENT
