This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite parties to pay `1,50,000 as compensation with cost.

The case of the complainant is that they have reserved for travelling on 11.06.2010 from Kannur to Howrah in first class compartment and supplied with valid reservation ticket having numbers 48150838 and 48150839 and paid `6,842 as reservation charge.  But they were provided with reservation facilities from Kannur to Madras Central and denied the facility from Madras Central to Howrah Junction.  When they enquired about the same, they were informed that they are in waiting list and therefore the complainants could not travel from Madras Central to Howrah.  But the complainants were holding valid reservation ticket.   So the complainants are constrained to stay at Madras for 2 days despite they contacted the railway authorities for reservation but was in vein.  So the complainants were constrained to travel by air incurring huge amount towards ticket fare.  The complainants hired taxi and went to airport on 14.06.2010 and traveled by jet airways by paying `6929 each for tickets.  The complainants incurred `4000 as taxi charges for traveling from Madras Central to airport and also spent `5000 by way of rent for staying.  All these were incurred due to the wrongful and deficient service of opposite party by not providing reservation ticket eventhough the complainants were holding valid reservation ticket for traveling to Howrah junction.  On 22.07.2010 to the complainants sent an application claiming refund to Chief Commercial Manager (refund) Southern Railway, Chennai, by enclosing the original reservation ticket, but so far no reply or refund was received by the complainant.  Hence the complaint.

In pursuance to the notice issued by the Forum all opposite parties appeared and filed their version admitting that the complainants were reserved tickets to travel from Kannur to Chennai Central by train No. 2842 on 12.06.2010 from Chennai to Howrah in 1^st class. Ticket No.48150838 was issued from Kannur by collecting `6842 with PNR No.441-8309877 for travel upto Chennai Central and reservation slip No.48150839 with PNR No.453-0750574 for travel from Chennai Central to Howrah junction.  The reservation status at the time of booking for train No.32602 of 11.06.10 was RAC 2 and 3, the same was clearly shown in the ticket No.48150838.  The same was subsequently confirmed and C coupe was allotted for travel from Kannur to Chennai Central.  The reservation status at the time of booking for train No.2842 of 12.06.2010 from Chennai to Howrah Junction was W/L5 and 6 and the same was clearly shown in the ticket No.48150839 and was subsequently improved to W/L 2 and 3.  So the statement that they boarded the train No.2602 on the strength of valid reservation ticket is not true.  The reservation status was duly informed by the TTE to this complainants as they are under waiting list 2 and 3.  The complainants were compelled to travel by flight due to wrongful act of opposite party by not providing reservation facility from Chennai Central to Howrah Junction eventhough the complainants were holding a valid reservation ticket for travelling upto  Howrah junction is not true.  It is not possible to provided confirmed reservation to all intending passengers, but upto the capacity of the coach or train that too on priority of booking only and the remaining passengers will be kept in waiting list upto a certain limit.  The application submitted by the complainant to Chief Commercial Manager (Refund), Southern Railway, Chennai by enclosing the original reservation ticket received on 26.07.2010 after a lapse of 44 days and the same was sent to Chief Commercial Manager (Refunds) Thiruchirapalli for further process where such cases are dealt.  As per rules in the case of partially used reserved ticket, the same should be surrendered at the station where the passenger terminates their journey and a Ticket Deposit receipt should be obtained and the same should be submitted to Chief Commercial Manager (Refunds) along with the application for refund within 90 days, the TDR shall be issued only upto 30 days after the scheduled departure of the train. After the verification of the application at Chief Commercial Manager (Refunds) the claim of refund was repudiated on 20.01.2011 and the repudiation letter sent to Smt. M.K. Suguna on the same day itself.  The complainant had hidden this real fact and purposefully misguided.   There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.  The status of ticket at the time of booking was … 5 and 6 and was improved to W/L 2 and 3 on 12.06.2010 and the same was informed by the TTE to the complainants on 12.06.2010 when they contacted him.  As per rules no refund shall be granted at a station on a ticket on which part of the journey has been under taken.  The passengers can surrender their ticket at the station where they terminate their journey and the TDR can be obtained in lieu of the surrendered ticket and may apply for refund within 90 days from the date of journey to Chief Commercial Manager (Refunds) enclosing the original ticket deposit receipt and the same was published in the Southern zone Railway Time Table (valid from November, 2009) in page No. 273, 274 and 275.  In this case the complainants had not surrender their waiting list tickets and had not obtained the TDR for refund.  So there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party and hene the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

Upon the above contentions the following issues have been raised for consideration.

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

2.     Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?

3.     Relief and cost.

The evidence in the above case consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and Ext.A1 to A6 and B1 to B3 .

          The complainants contended that due to deficient service of opposite parties they are not able to travel from Madras Central to Howrah on 12.06.2010 eventhough they have valid reservation ticket and the opposite parties have not refunded the value of partly used ticket from Madras Central to Howrah.  In order to prove the case the PW1 was examined and produced documents such as copy of reservation ticket from Kannur to Chennai Central, Reservation slip from Chennai Central to Howrah, itinerary receipts and copy of letter issued by the complainant to Chief Commercial Manager (refund) etc.  The opposite party also produced documents such as copy of chart for train No.2602 of 11.06.2010, copy of repudiation letter, Southern Zone Time table and refund rules.

            According to opposite party the complainants have only waiting list ticket from Chennai Central to Howrah on 12.06.2010 and their reservation status is waiting list 2 and 3.  As per Ext.A2 reservation slip the status is waiting list 4 and 5 and the opposite party submitted that status was changed as waiting list 2 and 3 on 12.06.2010, the date of intended journey from Chennai Central to Howrah.  Ext.B1 substantiates this contention.  The PW1 also deposed that “Madras- \n¶v s{Sbn³ ]pds¸Sp¶ kab¯v waiting list 2,3 Bbncp¶p position. waiting listImÀ¡v h­nbn Ibdmw, koänencn¡m³ Ignbnà F¶mWv Rm³ a\Ênem¡nbXv.”  This deposition also substantiate the case of opposite party that the complainants position is waiting list 2 and 3, at the time train started from Chennai Central to Howrah.  Moreover the complainants have no case that they have boarded to the train from Chennai central and have not given reservation eventhough there was seats available.  So admittedly the complainants status is waiting list and hence they have not boarded to the train from Madras Central.  So in such a case there is nothing is seen to attribute deficiency of service on the part of opposite party, especially it is not possible to provide confirmed reservation to all intending passengers.  The reservation is confirmed as per the capacity of the coach along with priority of booking.  So we are unable to find fault with the opposite party in providing confirmed reservation to a waiting listed passengers.

            Yet another contention put forwarded by the complainants is that the opposite parties have not refunded the value of the partially used ticket from Chennai central to Howrah eventhough  they had applied for refund within 44 days of alleged incident.  But opposite party contended that the complainants have not surrendered the alleged ticket to the Chennai Central and not produced ticket deposit receipt along with the refund claim.  As per refund rules produced by opposite party pertaining to partially used tickets, no refund at the station.  Only TDR to be issued at journey teminating station.  The passenger has to make an application to Chief Commercial Manager (Refund) within 90 days from the date of journey.  So the opposite party has repudiated the claim for refund.  So we are of the opinion that the opposite parties have acted in accordance with the refund rules and it is found that there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed and order passed accordingly.

            In the result complaint dismissed.  No cost.

  Dated this the 28^th day of September, 2012.

                  Sd/-                    Sd/-

                       President             Member            

APPENDIX

Exhibits for the Complainant

A1. Copy of the ticket.

A2. Copy of the ticket.

A3. Flight ticket.

A4. Flight ticket.

A5. Refund notice copy sent by complainant.

A6. Authorisation letter.

Exhibits for the opposite parties

B1.  Chart for Train No.2602 on 11.06.10 of 1^st class from CCM.

B2.   Letter dated 10.10.11.

B3.  Vehicle guidance particulars.

Witness examined for the complainant

PW1.  Complainant No.2 rep. by M.K. Saguna.

Witness examined for opposite party

Nil

                                                                        /forwarded by order/

                                                                     SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT