Smt. Karishma Mandal

1. In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-

1. To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 2 Lacks to 2.5 Lacks approximately including compensation and litigation costs.

2. The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-

The complainant has asserted that he is an practicing advocate of Patna High Court and went to Ranchi for treatment of his mother by Dr. Mrityunjay Kumar who suggested that his mother required thorough care and rest to take his mother safely and with comfort the complainant booked ticket for himself and his mother with opposite parties for 10.11.2013.

It is the case of the complainant that on the date of journey i.e. 10.11.2013 he received a message on his mobile number from opposite party that there is breakdown of the aforesaid bus hence the opposite parties are unable to arrange another bus. However when the complainant with his mother reached the office of opposite parties for journey he was informed that the destination point has been changed from the Government Bus Stand to office of Gaurav Luxury. Thereafter, the complainant, on the advice of the manager and staff of opposite parties, moved to other destination as advised by them and after many request the manager of Ranchi Branch came and informed that the bus could not be arranged. However, after 2-3 hrs, a bus was arranged which condition was pathetic and it was not suitable for his ailing mother. Thereafter in the midnight he came to a relative house with much difficulties and on the next day the complainant has to travel in the general compartment of Jan Shatabdi Exp. being train number 12366 as no seat in A.C. coach was available. Due to travelling in the general compartment of Jan Shatabdi Exp., the condition of his mother became pathetic. In Patna office of opposite parties, when the complainant requested to refund his fare the same was refused. The complainant has asserted that due to conduct of opposite parties he could not attend the court in Patna on 11.11.2013 and had missed his cases in which his presence was urgently required.

Apart from it, his mother’s condition also detoriated due to travelling in general coach of Jan Shatabdi as referred above. The complainant has annexed the E – Ticket of the Gaurav Luxury ( Bihar TC) as annexure -1 and passengers list of the aforesaid transport who were to travel by the aforesaid bus with complainant as annexure – 2 the railway E – Ticket of 11.11.2013 has been annexed as annexure – 3.

On behalf of opposite party no. 2 and 3 a written statement has been filed, in Para – 4 of which it is admitted that on the date of journey i.e. 10.11.2013 there was a breakdown of the bus however a comfortable bus was arranged but the complainant did not travelled by that bus.

It has been further asserted by opposite party no. 2 and 3 that so far refund of amount of ticket is concerned it was duty of Red Bus who has not been made party.

On behalf of complainant a rejoinder has been filed stating therein that the complainant booked two tickets from Red Bus and from perusal of ticket it is evident that “ Red Bus is only a bus ticket agent and it does not operate bus services of its own.” It has also been stated that as service is provided by opposite parties according to contract hence all responsibility lies with the opposite parties and not with the Red Bus.

The grievance of the complainant is that as the bus in question could not be provided for travelling on the pretext of breaking down and no suitable bus was offered in that place hence opposite parties are responsible for deficiency because such action has resulted in pathetic condition of complainant’s mother illness as well as intense mental torture because he could not attend his urgent cases in Patna Court on 11.11.2013. the opposite parties in Para – 4 of counter affidavit have admitted that “unfortunately the bus was broken down” but despite that a suitable bus was provided. The complainant has asserted that the condition of the bus which was being offered with much delay was also pathetic and not fit for travelling of his mother.

On behalf of opposite parties no bus number or other details of the bus which was offered in place of Luxury bus has been mentioned.

The aforesaid conduct of opposite parties clearly proves serious deficiency on their part.

So far the refund of fare is concerned it was duty of the opposite parties to get the fare of the complainant refunded as the complainant and his mother were not provided comfortable bus.

In the aforementioned circumstances the opposite parties are responsible for the deficiency in service.

Hence we direct the opposite parties to refund Rs. 1,260/- ( Rs. One Thousand two Hundred Sixty only ) vide annexure – 1 to the complainant within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order failing which the opposite parties will pay 10% interest on the above said amount of Rs. 1,260/- ( Rs. One Thousand two Hundred Sixty only ) till its final payment.

Opposite parties are further directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- ( Rs. Ten thousand only ) to the complainant within the period of two months.

Accordingly this complaint stands allowed to the extent referred above.

                             Member                                                                              President