Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

196/2014

Mr.Sridhar - Complainant(s)

Versus

SRS Travels,Rep by its Authorized Signatory - Opp.Party(s)

V.Ramesh Vel

08 Jul 2016

ORDER

                                                                                             Complaint presented on  : 08.10.2014                                                                                                     

                                                                       Order pronounced on  : 08.07.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,         :      PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,            :     MEMBER II

 

FRIDAY THE  08^th   DAY OF JULY 2016

 

C.C.NO.196/2014

 

 

Mr. Sridhar,

Son of Subramani,

Aged about 47 years,

Residing at 193/15, MS Koil Street,

Royapuram,

Chennai – 600 013.

 

 

 

                                                                                          ..... Complainant

 

..Vs..

	1.SRS Travels, Having its head Office at No.321, TSP Road, Opposite to Bangalore Medical College, Kalasipalayam, Bangalore- 560 002. Rep by its Authorized Signatory.   2.SRS Travels, Having its branch office at 100 feet road, Koyambedu, Chennai. Phone No.044 23455192, Also at SRS Travels, Omni bus Terminus, Koyambedu, Chennai, Rep by its Authorized Signatory. 3.Deviprasad, SRS Travels, Having its branch office at Omni bus Terminus, Koyambedu, Chennai.
	...Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                  : 15.10.2014

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.V.Ramesh Vel, 403/2000

Counsel for   opposite parties                  : Mrs.K.P.Kiran Rao

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1. THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant booked 40 seated Air Conditioner bus on 27.03.2014, for the trip from Chennai to Thirukadaiyur on 17.05.2014 and return back trip on 18.05.2014 from Thirukadaiyur to Chennai for attending 60^th Marriage Anniversary of his in-laws (i.e) Father- in-law and Mother-in-law. The Complainant submits that at the time of booking one Muthukumar (contact No.9840987928) of the Opposite Parties No.1& 2 attended the Complainant and a sum of Rs.5,000/- was paid as advance for the bus bearing No.TN 70L 9591 which is 40 seated A/C  bus. The details of the charges are Rs.12,000/- per day up to 200 km and for a extra kilometer a sum of  Rs.40/-, Driver Bata  per day is Rs.500/- and Tolgate and parking charges extra. On 12.05.2014 one Radha of the Opposite Party No.2 contacted and informed the Complainant that only 36 seated bus is available and no option to provide 40 seated A/C bus and having no other option the Complainant accepted the request of the Opposite Party, since it was made at the fag end of the trip and in view of the change of the bus originally booked, the rate was reduced as from Rs.12,000/- per day to Rs.11,500/- per day. On 17.05.2014 at 5.30 a.m the Complainant contacted the 3^rd Opposite Party and asked him to provide the mobile number and name of the driver and at the juncture the 3^rd Opposite Party was provided the driver name as Mahesh and his mobile number. Till 7.30 a.m the bus was not arrived, the Complainant contacted the said driver Mahesh and no proper explanation was given and having no other go the Complainant along with his one of the relative went to booking office at Koyambedu and he was put to shock the bus was not ready and after much pain and sufferings the bus was started at Koyambedu  only at 9.00 a.m and it reached the place of trip at Ramapuram only at 10.00 a.m instead of 7.00 a.m. While travelling within 18 kms of travel, the cap in the radiator got burst at Peerkankarani and till 12.15 p.m the bus was not ready for travel and over the delay due to the repair of the bus, having no other go the Complainant through his source arranged a car and sent the couples of the 60^th marriage anniversary and with very important members of the family.  Only by  2.15 p.m the driver reported bus was ready and thereafter within 15 miniutes of travel at Maraimalar Nagar again the bus was stopped by the driver stating that a major problem occurred in the bus and it is not possible to repair the same and he contacted the Opposite Party No.2 and thereafter informed the Complainant that an alternative bus was arranged and asked the Complainant to wait for some time. The alternative bus arrived at 3.30 p.m and the said bus was ordinary bus which was used for local trip and it was non-A/C          without any audio or video player and it contains only ordinary seats and the bus reached the destination place (i.e) Thirukadaiyur only by 11.30 p.m. The driver of the bus demanded Rs.10,000/- to fill up the fuel stating that the bus was diverted all of the sudden and it does not contain fuel for return back and the Complainant paid Rs.10,000/- as demanded by the driver. Over the Deficiency in Service and lethargic attitude on Opposite Parties , the Complainant and his family members could not able to attend the evening ceremony on 17.05.2014 which is also important part of 60^th marriage anniversary ceremony (special pooja) which was over by 6.00 to 7.30 p.m itself and without the presence of relatives. The  said ceremony was over as in the case of orphan and the Complainant and other members of his family were put to mental agony and sufferings and they underwent sentimental emotional feelings. After completing the remaining morning function of the 60^th marriage anniversary on 18.05.2014, the Complainant and his family members were returned to Chennai and over the continuous torture and harassment at the hands of Opposite Party No.3. The Complainant having no other go, gave a Complaint to the Ramapuram police and only after warning by the police the threatening and harassing calls was stopped by the Opposite Party No.3.  The Complainant over the demand made by the driver paid a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the drivers as driver batta and the Complainant informed the Opposite Party No.2 that he will come in person with regard to the settlement and asked the Opposite Party No.2 to provide a bill for everything. Thereafter the Complainant visited Opposite Party No.2, one Chakravarthy attended the Complainant and he did not furnished the trip bill though they received already Rs.5,000/- as advance, Rs.10,000/- towards fuel charges and Rs.2,000/- towards driver bata and having no other go the Complainant asked the said Chakravarthy to e-mail the bills so as to make payment if any and till today no response at the hands of the Opposite Parties, despite the painful sufferings harassment and mental agony suffered by the Complainant. Arranging separate car on 17.05.2014 over their failure to send the bus as originally booked, the Complainant caused a legal notice to the Opposite Parties on 28.05.2014 .The 1^st Opposite Party sent a reply 23.06.2014 denying the contents of the notice. Thereafter, the Complainant filed this Complaint claiming a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the expenses met for engaging a car from Chennai to Thirukadaiyur to facilitate the couple to reach in time in order to hold the function between 6.p.m to 7.30.p.m on 17.05.2014 and also compensation for mental agony with cost of the Complaint.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES IS IN BRIEF:

          As per their booking procedure, the Complainant ought to have deposited the full estimated amount which the Complainant has failed and neglected to pay. On oral request the Complainant has asked and taken the vehicle from their then staff. The Complainant has stated in his own language that the radiator cap got burst whereas, the radiator cap became loose and   that was re-fixed by the driver and the vehicle was ready to move. But the Complainant has insisted for some other vehicle expressing his sentiments and agreed to the term that he would make full payment for both the vehicles. Accordingly, the second vehicle completed the trip and the 1^st vehicle got detained.  On the whole the Complainant has completed the journey, where the Opposite Parties have provided the second vehicle also at his request which has served the Complainant’s purpose and returning the first bus with full payment assurance. The Opposite Parties also called upon the Complainant to pay Rs.40,000/- towards charges for the two buses and a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- for causing mental agony by torturing the present staff unnecessarily. As per the Complainant’s instructions they have arranged two buses, one the Complainant has operated and used for the trip and the other one the Complainant has returned with an assurance that full payment would be made because of change of the bus for sentimental reasons of the Complainant only.  The Opposite Parties therefore pray that his Hon’ble Forum may be pleased to dismiss the above Complaint with exemplary costs and with a direction to the Complainant to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards charges for the two buses and thus render justice.

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?

4. POINT NO:1

          The admitted facts are  that the Complainant booked a 40 seated Air conditioner bus on 27.03.2014 for the trip Chennai to Thirukadaiyur on 17.05.2014 and  pickup at 7.00 a.m at Royapuram and return back on 18.05.2014 at 3.00 p.m and the rate fixed for the bus  @Rs.12,000/- per day upto 200kms and for an extra    km a sum of Rs.40/- and driver bata per day a sum of Rs.500/- and at the time of booking the Complainant paid a sum of Rs.5000/- towards advance payment and the Opposite Parties also issued Ex.A2 receipt for such booking and on 17.05.2014 accordingly the Complainant group travelled the Opposite Parties bus to Thirukadaiyur and after attending function  on the next day they returned to Chennai on 18.05.2014.

          5. According to the Complainant the deficiencies committed by the Opposite Parties are that as agreed in Ex.A2 booking receipt, the bus was not arrived to Royapuram to pick up the Complainant group members  and hence the Complainant with one of his relatives gone to Koyambedu and found that the bus was not ready and thereafter much efforts of the Complainant, the bus started  at Koyambedu only by 9.00a.m and reached the place of pick up at 10.00 a.m instead of 7.00 a.m, further after travelling nearly for 18 km, the radiator cap got burst at Peerkankarani  and till 12.15 p.m the bus was not ready for travel and however in the meantime the Complainant arranged a car and sent the couples of the 16^th marriage anniversary with important members of the family accompanied them to perform special pooja schedule on the day evening at 6.00p.m to 7.30 p.m and after  repair they started the journey and within 15 minutes of travel again the bus was stopped and driver informed that a major problem occurred in the bus and it is not possible to repair the same and after contacting the 2^nd Opposite Party an alternative Non AC Bus   was arranged and again started the journey at 3.30 p.m and reached  Thirukadaiyur by 11.30.p.m only and due to their delay in arrival they have missed the special pooja and hence the Complainant and his family members and other members  was put to mental agony, suffering and underwent sentimental and emotional feelings.

          6. The version of the Complainant that the bus reached at the pickup place only at 10.a.m instead of 7.00 a.m not denied by the Opposite Parties either in the written version or in their proof affidavit. The vehicle was stopped at Peekankaranai and at Maraimalainagar due to defects in the bus was not denied by the Opposite Parties. The version of the Opposite Parties that only radiator cap was loose and that was re-fixed. However the Opposite Parties have not denied that the bus was stopped at Maraimalainagar and the statement of their driver that major problems occurred in the bus. The non denial of the above facts only proves the deficiencies of the Opposite Parties that as agreed in Ex.A7 booking receipt he had provided the bus at the pickup spots with delay of 3 hours and due to major problems in the bus, the Opposite Parties provided alternative bus at Maraimalainagar to continue the journey is accepted.

          7. The performing of the 60^th Marriage Ceremony would have lot of sentiments and emotions of the family members and the couple. Since the bus became defective the Complainant arranged a car and the couples and important family members were sent in the car enabling them to perform special pooja scheduled at 6.00p.m to 7.30.p.m. It is also a common practice in the Hindu System is that previous night the special pooja would be performed. The Opposite Parties have not denied the said special pooja. Hence the contention of the Complainant that he sent the couples and important family members to perform the pooja in a car has been accepted.  Further the family members travelled in the bus reached Thirukadaiyur only at 11.30.p.m is also accepted and further those members have travelled in the bus unable to participate in the special pooja only due to the deficiency in service of the Opposite Parties.

          8. The Opposite Parties deny that they have not committed any Deficiency in Service and further as per the booking procedure the Complainant ought to have paid the full estimated amount  and however he had paid only a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards advance and further the radiator cap became loose and not got burst as stated by the Complainant and the vehicle was ready to move  and however  the Complainant has insisted for some other vehicle expressing his sentiments and that was also provided and further the Complainant retained both the vehicles due to sentiments and assuring to pay for both the vehicles and however he did not pay any other amount, though the Opposite Parties  called upon to pay Rs.40,000/- towards charges for two buses and a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- for causing mental agony to their staff  and therefore the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service and it is the Complainant only committed fault by not paying the bus charges.

          9. Ex.A2 is the booking receipt issued for receipt of Rs.5,000/- as advance. Nowhere in Ex.A2 it has been stated that at the time booking full estimated amount have to be deposited. Further no documents filed by the Opposite Parties for the proof to deposit full estimated amount. The Complainant would state that he had paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards to fill up the fuel and also paid a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the driver. Such payment was not denied by the Opposite Parties. Therefore the Statement of the Complainant that he paid money to fill up the fuel and also driver bata is accepted. Therefore, the contention of the Opposite Parties that the Complainant paid only Rs. 5,000/- towards their journey is not correct and on the other hand the Complainant paid a sum of Rs.17,000/- including advance as stated above.

10.  The next contention of the Opposite Parties is that no proof filed for arranging a another car and spent Rs.10,000/-. Though no bill has been in filed, the car arranged by the Complainant in an unexpected situation in order to attend the special pooja on 17.05.2014 evening and the also did it. In such circumstances a bill for travelling in the car not filed is not a ground for suspicion in the Complainant case.

11. The next contention of the Opposite Parties is that the Complainant has not paid the full amount for the journey performed by him and hence he cannot be considered as a Consumer. Under Ex.A2 the Opposite Parties agreed to provide service for the days 17.05.2014 and 18.05.2014 after receipt of advance amount by way of booking. The Complainant also paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- to fill up the fuel while performing the journey and also paid a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the driver towards part of consideration. If the Complainant is due to the Opposite Parties they could have claimed from the Complainant by sending communication to him. However, they did not do so before action was taken by the Complainant by issuing lawyer notice.  Only in the reply notice the Opposite Parties claims a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards charges and some amount for compensation. Such claim of the Opposite Parties is beyond the scope of this Consumer Complaint. Therefore we hold that the Complainant is a Consumer in this Complaint.

12. Therefore as discussed above we hold that the Opposite Parties have committed Deficiency in Service to the Complainant.

13. POINT NO:2

          Since the Opposite Parties have committed Deficiency in Service, the Complainant and his family members and other relatives suffered with mental agony is accepted and to compensate the same, it would be appropriate to order a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for mental agony would meet the  ends of justice. Further a sum of Rs.5,000/- can be ordered by engaging a car to send the couples early besides, a sum of Rs.5,000/-  towards litigation expenses.

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties 1 to 3  jointly or severally  are ordered to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards expenses for engaging the car to the Complainant  and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only)  towards compensation for mental agony, besides a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses.

The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of payment.

Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 08^th    day of July 2016.

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 05.03.2014                   Airtel Bill Statement of the Complainant for the

               To 04.04.2014            petitioner

 

Ex.A2 dated 27.03.2014                   Booking details and receipt given by the Opposite

                                                Party

 

Ex.A3 dated 08.05.2014                   E-mail by the Complainant to the Opposite Parties

 

Ex.A4 dated 18.05.2014                   Invitation of 60^th Marriage Anniversary of

                                                Chandiran and Neelavadi of Thirukadiyur

 

Ex.A5 dated 18.05.2014                   Bill issued by the Amirtha Ganesha Gurukkal

 

Ex.A6 dated  19.05.2014                  E-mail send by Complainant

 

Ex.A7 dated 05.04.2014                   Airtel Bill Statement of the Complainant

             To  04.05.2014

 

Ex.A8 dated 05.05.2014                   Airtel Bill Statement of the Complainant

            To   04.06.2014

 

Ex.A9 dated 28.05.2014                   Lawyers Notice with Postal receipts send by the

                                               Complainant to the Opposite Parties

 

Ex.A10 dated 07.06.2014                 Acknowledgement card by the 1^st Opposite Party

 

Ex.A11 dated 10.06.2014                 Returned cover’s of the 2^nd Opposite Party

 

Ex.A12 dated 10.06.2014                 Returned cover of the 3^rd Opposite Party

 

Ex.A13 dated 23.06.2014                 Reply send by the 1^st Opposite Party

 

Ex.A14 dated NIL                             Photographs of the repaired bus bearing No.TN 22

                                                CK 5235    

 

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTIES :

 

                                                ….NIL….

 

 

 

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT