Date of Filing:13.07.2007<br /> Date of Order: 04.01.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 1475 OF 2007 <br /> <br /> Basanth Raj Gandhi,<br /> S/o Manmohanlal Gandhi,<br /> R/at No. 349/1, 10th Main,<br /> BSK I Stage, II Block,<br /> Bangalore-560 050. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> 1. The Chief Commercial Manager (Refund),<br /> New Administration Building,<br /> II Floor, Central Railway,<br /> Mumbai, CST-400 001. Opposite Party<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> This complaint is filed U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for refund of Rs.2,635/- and for damages.<br /> The facts of the case are that, the complainant has purchased railway tickets from Valsada to Bangalore and Bhilwara to Bangalore. The train from Bhilwara to Bangalore was cancelled due to heavy rains. The Station Officer agreed to refund the ticket amount and accordingly Station Master issued ticket deposit receipt (TDR) to the complainant and it was assured that amount will be returned within two weeks from the date of TDR. Complainant filed application for refund of fair to the opposite party. Complainant wrote a letter demanding refund of the ticket amount, but till today the amount was not refunded. Complainant several times requested the opposite party to refund the amount. The opposite party has to pay sum of Rs.2,625/- along with damages of Rs.5,000/-.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. The opposite party appeared through counsel and filed defense version stating that, as per Sec.15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, no Court or any authority shall be entitled to exercise any jurisdiction. Therefore, the opposite party requested to dismiss the complaint.<br /> 3. Affidavit evidence of complainant and also the Deputy Chief Commercial Manager of Railway have been filed. Arguments are heard. <br /> 4. The point for consideration is:-<br /> Whether the complainant is entitled for <br /> refund of Rs.2,625/- from the opposite party? <br /> <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 5. The complainant has produced ticket deposit receipts. In the said receipts he has mentioned the train number, PNR number, date of journey, reservation ticket number and the amount of fair and all the details have been given in all the three TDR. The complainant has also submitted application for refund of fair to the Chief Commercial Manager (refund), Central Railway. The refund application was submitted to the opposite party by the complainant on 17/8/2005. From the documents produced by the complainant it is clearly established that the complainant had purchased Railway ticket and seats were reserved and reservation tickets were issued to the complainant and his family. It is the case of the complainant that, due to heavy rain the scheduled train was cancelled and therefore, the complainant deposited the tickets and obtained TDR and he has also filed refund application. Therefore, it becomes the duty and obligation of the opposite party to refund the amount to the complainant immediately, but in spite of notice and several requests the opposite party has not refunded the ticket amount. This is definitely a deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The opposite party has taken unnecessary dispute. There is absolutely no merits or substance in the defense taken by the opposite party. The TDR have been duly signed by the Station Master when the tickets were deposited and refund application was filed by the party it becomes duty of the Railway Authority to refund the amount. The complainant has submitted the refund application to the Chief Commercial Manager (refund) within 90 days from the date of journey and in spite of compliance of law Railway Department has failed to refund the amount. Therefore, it is very unfortunate on the part of the Railway Department in not refunding the amount to the party as per law. The untenable and unacceptable defense has been taken by the Railway Authority stating that the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. It is argued by the learned counsel for the opposite party that U/Sec.15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 there is bar of jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. He also referred to Sec.13 of the Act after going through the provision of Sec.13 and 15 of Railway Claims Tribunal Act,1987 it is very clear that the bar applies in respect of claim of compensation for loss, destruction, damage, deterioration or non-delivery of animals or goods entrusted to a railway administration for carriage by railway. Such being the case, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the Railway cannot be accepted at all. This Forum has got jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and to grant the relief. The Railways refusing to refund the amount is definitely a deficiency of service and it has been so held by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in a case reported in AIR page-34 wherein, it has been held as under:- <br /> Sec.2(1)(g)- Deficiency in service-Railway ticket refund-Respondent holding confirmed ticket to Allahabad on train ‘A’ bought ticket of train ‘B’ and traveled, as train ‘A’ was delayed by 5.5 hours and she wanted to reach destination urgently-Unreasonable of Railway to except her to surrender ticket at Delhi and get refund there itself and withhold her refund-Surrendering unused ticket at Allahabad next day and obtaining TDR, sufficient compliance of Rules-Railways refusing refund-Amounts to deficiency in service-Compensation granted, proper.<br /> (NOC) 1623 (NCC) (B)<br /> So in view of above authority of law, the railways in this case cannot deny the complainant in refund of the amount. Therefore, it is the duty and obligation on the part of the Railway to refund the ticket amount. The railways shall be ordered to pay costs and compensation for dragging the complainant to the Forum for getting the relief. The complainant has wasted his money, energy and time in getting the relief. In the result, we proceed to pass the following:- <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to refund Rs.2,625/-(ticket fare) to the complainant. The complainant is also entitled to Rs. 1,000/- as compensation and another Rs.1,000/- towards costs of the present proceedings.<br /> 7. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> 8. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2008.<br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br />