Orissa

Jharsuguda

CC/6/2018

Prof. Tahalu sahu , S/O- Late Ramani Ranjan Sahu - Complainant(s)

Versus

St. Station Mananger, - Opp.Party(s)

B.K. Behera

05 Sep 2018

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

                                        

                                                          CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 06 OF 2018

 

Prof. Tahalu Sahu(69 Yrs.),

S/O: Late Ramani Ranjan Sahu,

RO/AT: Beheramal Ashirbad Dental Clinic,

PO: Industrial Estate,

PS/ Dist- Jharsuguda, Odisha…………………….……..………..Complainant.

     

                                           Versus 

 

1. Sr. Station Manager,

S.E.Railway,Jharsuguda,

AT/PO/Dist: Jharsuguda.

 

2. Sr. Divisional Commercial Manager,

S.E.Railway CKP Division,

Chakradharpur, Dist:Singhbhum(Jharkhand).

 

3. Chief Commercial Manager (Refund),

South Eastern Railway,

14^th strand Road, 9^th Floor,

Kolkatta- 700 001....................................................... Opp. Parties.

 

Counsel for the Parties:-

 

For the Complainant                             B.K.Behera, Advocate.

For the O.P. No. 1 to 3                       H.K. Purohit, Advocate

                                                           .

Date of Order: 05.09.2018

 

Present

 

                                        1. Shri Santosh Kumar Ojha, Member.

                                        2. Smt. Anamika Nanda, Member (W).

 

Shri Santosh Kumar Ojha, Member:- The complainant being a senior citizen filed this case against the O.Ps for refund of fares for cancelled railway reservation tickets paid by him through his Debit Card. In brief, the complaint case is that, the complainant booked railway reservation tickets on dtd.20.01.2017, 26.01.2017, 01.02.2017 and 07.02.2017 from Jharsuguda Railway Reservation Counter for journey of some other persons by paying through his Debit Card.  Due to the ticket holders could not journey, the said tickets were cancelled at reservation counter of Jharsuguda on dtd.26.01.2017 for refund of Rs.5,285/- bearing ticket No. ZO7285995, ticket No.ZO7291992 dtd.07.02.2017 for refund of Rs.4,305/- only, ticket No.ZO7289096 dtd.01.02.2017 for refund of Rs.6,125/- only  and ticket No.ZO7289095 dtd.01.02.2017 for refund of Rs.4,355/- only , Rs. 3,660/-  bearing PNR No.6663617088 having tickets ZO7283824 cancelled on dtd.09.02.2017 and Rs.1560/- bearing PNR No.6763615936 having tickets ZO7283677 cancelled dtd. 09.02.2017 i.e in total Rs.25,290/-only but the O.Ps. did not take any action. The complainant written and orally approached before the different concerned authorities of O.Ps. but the O.Ps. taken deaf ear, hence this case.

 

            In reply, the O.Ps. appeared and filed their written version jointly through their learned advocate.  The O.Ps. strongly objected on maintainability of the case and submitted that the said tickets are in names of some other persons  except the complainant and the complainant is a “Third Party” who have no right to cancel the ticket nor to demand for refund of fair.  Since the passengers have not yet been submitted their Ticket Deposit Receipt (T.D.R), the process of refund of fare to them could not be progressed. The O.Ps. also submitted that this Hon’ble Forum has lacks its jurisdiction to decide the matter which fell U/s-13(1) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act,1987 and prayed the Forum  on the case to be dismissed.

           

            The matter heard from both the sides. After going in thorough over the case record and documentary evidences, some issues on the point of law and facts arisen which are to be resolved first, such as .

 

1. Whether the case is maintainable in the eye of law ?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief ?

 

The very first issue is on the point of law raised by the O.Ps. by filing the copy of citation of The Railway Claims Tribunal Act,1987 on the jurisdiction of Consumer Fora on deciding the dispute mentioned above which cited as

 

U/s-13(1) (b)  of The Railway Claims Tribunal Act,1987 “in respect of the claims for refund of fares or part thereof or for refund of any freight paid in respect of animals or goods entrusted to a railway administration to be carried by railway”.

So also he has mentioned “Sec-15. Bar of Jurisdiction- On and from the appointed day, no court or other authority shall have, or be entitled to exercise any jurisdiction, powers or authority in relation to the matters referred to in ( sub-sections(1) and (1-A) of section13”.

 

But U/s-3 of The Consumer Protection Act,1986 stands as, “Act not in derogation of any other law.—The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force”.

 

In one hand U/s-15 barred the jurisdiction of no Court or other authority shall have, or be entitled to exercise any jurisdiction, power or authority in relation to the matters referred to the refund of fares as the case exists but in the other hand the provision of U/s-3 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 exercises its jurisdiction which is not in derogation of any other law for the time being in force so also the provisions of this Act are in addition to the provisions of other law for the time being in force. 

 

In the above limelight the Hon’ble Apex court of India has held and made it clear since long on the powers vested U/s-3 of The Consumer Protection Act,1986.  Out of those the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in a case has held between M/S. Fair Air Engineers Pvt. Ltd.& - vs - N.K.Modi (1996) that ,

 

“Accordingly, it must be held that the provisions of the Act are to be construed widely to live effect to the object and purpose of the Act. It is seen that Section 3 envisages that the provisions of the Act are in addition to and are not in derogation of any other law in forces. it is true, as rightly contended by Shri, that the words "in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force" would be given proper meaning and effect and if the complaint is not stayed and the parties are not relegated to the arbitration, the Act purports to operate in derogation of the provisions of the Arbitration Act”.

And in the same case further held that,

“Section 3 thereof, we are of the considered view that it would be appropriate that these forums created under the Act are at liberty to proceed with the matters in accordance with the provisions of the Act rather than relegating the parties to an arbitration proceedings pursuant to a contract entered into between the parties. The reason is that the Act intends to relieve the consumers of the cumbersome arbitration proceedings or civil action unless the forums on their own and on the peculiar facts and circumstances of particular case, come to the conclusion that the appropriate forum for adjudication of the disputes would be otherwise those given in the Act”.

As such the present case is very much maintainable before the Consumer Fora or can say at this Hon’ble Forum. On deciding the second issue as raised by the O.Ps, mentioning the “Thirty Party” as the tickets in question are in the name of some different persons who are the passengers such as J.Sahu, B. Sahu, Dr. Govind Sahu and Premsila Sahu mentioned in PNR No.6663617088 and the passengers namely Mukharam, A.Sahu and Gangaram mentioned in the PNR No. 6763615936…..  etc. in other tickets, but the tickets were purchased by the complainant against his Debit Card.  U/s-2(1) (d) (ii)    of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 which reads as,

 

 “(ii)     hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly prom­ised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who 'hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person but does not include a person who avails of such services for any commercial purposes;”

In this case the complainant has himself purchased railway reservation tickets for the above mentioned passengers on their approval by paying his money and by debiting the ticket amounts through his Debit Card on dtd. 20.01.2017 having amount of Rs.4,640/- only bearing POS 000405726017 SER Jharsuguda, amounting Rs.7,370/-only  POS 000405786595 SER Jharsuguda and  amounting Rs.4,630/-only  POS 000413278589 SER Jharsuguda on dtd.26.01.2017,  amounting Rs.6,515/- only bearing PNR No. 6160927956, amounting Rs.5,675/-only bearing PNR No. 6663795325 and amounting Rs. 5,495/- only bearing PNR No. 6160747072 which cannot be brushed aside to be a “consumer” of the O.Ps. as per the said provision of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 as such the complainant shall not be treated as “Third Party” rather a “consumer” in this case and he is entitled for his relief.

While the complainant is a consumer and paid money for purchasing of railway reservation tickets for other passengers on their approval through the system of Debit Card by debiting the ticket amounts as mentioned above through his S/B A/C No.11346766640 of State Bank of India, Jharsuguda Branch, on cancellation of those tickets the complainant is entitled absolutely to get the refund of railway reservation tickets the amount of which are to be credited in his said S/B Account mentioned above. The amount of refund of fares on cancellation of tickets are Rs.5,285/- bearing PNR No.6663795325 having ticket No.ZO7285995 cancelled on dtd. 26.01.2017, Rs. 6,125/- bearing PNR No.6160927956 having ticket No.ZO7289096 cancelled on dtd. 01.02.2017, Rs.4,305/- bearing PNR No.6763795626 having ticket No.ZO7291992 cancelled on dtd. 07.02.2017, Rs.4,355/- bearing PNR No.6160747072 having ticket No.ZO7289095 cancelled on dtd. 01.02.2017, Rs. 3,660/-  bearing PNR No.6663617088 having tickets ZO7283824 cancelled on dtd.09.02.2017 and Rs.1560/- bearing PNR No.6763615936 having tickets ZO7283677 cancelled dtd. 09.02.2017 i.e in total Rs.25,290/-only. The complainant written approached several times to the different concerned authorities on refund of fares including through RTI application also but the O.Ps. kept silent.

 

It is the settled principle of law that anyone who paid for obtaining railway reservation ticket either in shape of cash or in shape of any system of deferred payment is entitled to get refund amount on cancellation of the same after deduction of cancellation charges.

 

Indian Railways take reservation charges at the time of purchasing railway reservation tickets and also take cancellation charges at the time of cancellation of any railway reservation tickets which means the service provided which is not free of cost. 

 

In the present case the complainant has paid the same required charges mentioned above at the time of purchasing as well as cancellation of railway reservation tickets as such he is entitled to get his refund amounts.  The O.Ps.  simply ignored the complainant treating “Third Party” at the time of asking refund by the complainant but it could have been such while receiving against the said tickets in question. The O.Ps without any hesitation received the amounts of the said tickets purchased by the complainant which are in the name of other persons, but at the time of cancellation of tickets making harassment to a person who is a senior citizen, which appears bad in the eye of law.

 

The aforementioned circumstances and the activities of O.Ps clearly shows the gross deficiency in service towards the complainant, hence the complaint petition is hereby allowed with the directions to the O.Ps mentioned below in form of order :-

 

ORDER

 

1. The O.Ps are jointly and severally hereby directed to refund the cancellation amount of railway reservation tickets amounting Rs.25,290/- (Rupees twenty five thousand two hundred ninety) only by crediting in the Saving Bank account of the complainant bearing SB Account No. 11346766640 after adopting the due procedures, left if any.

 

2. The O.Ps are hereby jointly and severally further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) only to the complainant towards, harassment, mental agony including cost of the case.

 

3. All the above-mentioned orders are to be carried out within 30(thirty) days from the date of receipt of this order , failing which the O.Ps shall be liable for interest @12% per annum on the aforesaid awarded amounts till its realization.

 

Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today the 5^th day of September’ 2018 and copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties as per rule. 

         

I Agree.  

                             

1. Nanda, Member( W)                                                   S.K.Ojha, Member                      

Dictated and corrected by me,

 

      S.K.Ojha, Member.