PRESENT SRI P.V. NAGESWARA RAO, M.A., LL.M., PRESIDENT

SRI S.A. KHADER BASHA, B.Sc., MEMBER.

 

Wednesday, 7^th July 2010

 

Dr. P. Sreenivasulu Reddy, S/o Ramana Reddy,

aged 64 years, Resident of D.No. 1/713, Dwarakanagar,

Kadapa city, Kadapa District.                                                                                                                                                                                                 ….. Complainant.

Vs.

 

1) The General Manager, South Central Railway,

2) The Divisional Railway Manager, Guntakal Division,

     South Central Railways, Guntakal.                                                                                                                                                                                      ..….. Respondents.  

 

  

This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on  6-7-2010 in the presence of Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate for complainant and Sri K. Guru Murthy, Advocate for Respondents and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-

 

 

 

1.                Complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

 

2.                The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:- The complainant Dr. P Sreenivaslu Reddy is a well known medical practitioner at Kadapa and his wife is a senior lecturer. His daughter is carrying advance stage of pregnancy and his son-in-law is working as Software Engineer. He purchased one 2^nd class A/c ticket under PNR No. 1243849027 for his journey from Hyderabad to Kadapa by train No. 2797 (Venkatadri). His booking status was displayed – confirmed for the date 27-11-2009 and he was allotted lower birth. He paid Rs. 590/- towards the fare ticket excluding  Rs. 20/- towards IRCPC service charge as he purchased the ticket via Internet. His wife, daughter and son-in-law also prepared to cum to Kadapa from Hyderabad and he purchased three 2^nd class A/c tickets from them for the same train under PNR No. 1343638265 and he paid Rs. 3045/- towards fare of the tickets including Rs. 30/- towards IRCTC service charges. On 27-11-2009 he along with his wife, daughter and son-in-law reached the railway station at about 7.50 p.m and boarded the train No. 2797 and occupied their respective seats. As the journey starts and ends during the night time himself and his wife, daughter and son-in-law slept in the train and the train was scheduled to reach Kadapa at 4.30 p.m on 28-11-2009. At about 3.00 to 4.00 p.m on the early hours 28-11-2009 the complainant wokeup and observed that the train was stopped at Gooty Railway station. He made enquiries about the stopping of the train at Gooty. He was informed by the co-passengers at Gooty Railway Station that some railway wagons were derailed near Kadapa and due to that reason train was stopped at Gooty. The complainant and his family members astonished to hear that the railway announcement that the train in which they were traveling was diverted to Tirupati via Dharmavaram, Yashwanthpur, Katpadi to Tirupati and it was also announced to the passengers to get down the train those who are traveling for the intermediary stations from Gooty to Tirupati. Immediately, the complainant contacted with Railway staff at Gooty Railway Station and enquired with regard to alternative arrangements being taken up by the respondents Railway Authorities. But, they informed him that the respondents have not made any alternative arrangements for the passengers, who have to travel to intermediary stations in between Gooty and Tirupati Stations. He also contacted the higher officials of the respondents organization. But, there was no positive response from their end. Having no other go he along with his three family members waited till 7.000 a.m at Gooty Railway Station itself and reached Tadipatri town by engaging a taxi on hire by taking lot of pains. Finally they could get their own vehicle that came from Kadapa to Tadipatri and they traveled from Tadipatri to Kadapa in their own vehicle and reached their home town around 1.00 p.m. The complainant incurred Rs. 5,000/- towards taxi charges and for fuel charges of the vehicles. Due to the deficiency of service the complainant and his family members suffered a lot physically, mentally and financially. The complainant got issued a legal notice dt. 20-1-2010 calling upon the respondents to pay compensation towards taxi charges. Having received legal notice the respondents failed to give any reply. Hence, this complaint was filed by the complainant requesting this forum to direct the respondents to pay an amount of Rs. 90,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony and physically strain to the complainant and his family members along with interest @ 18% p.a. and Rs. 5,000/- towards expenses incurred towards taxi charges fuel charges to reach their destination and Rs. 2,000/- towards cots of the complainant. 

 

3.                Both the respondents have filed a counter stating that the complaint is unjust and not maintainable either in law or on facts of the case.   The complainant is put to strict proof of all the allegations which are not expressly admitted herein by the respondents. The complainant and his family members purchased tickets through internet in 2^nd class A/c vide PNR No. 1243849027 and 1343638265 to travel from Hyderabad to kadapa by train No. 2797 (Venkatadri Express) on 27-11-2009.   The allegations in para – 2 of the complaint that the railway staff informed the complainant that they have not made any alternative arrangements for the passengers who have to travel to intermediary stations in between Gooty to Tirupati stations is false. The allegations that there was no positive response from higher officials of the respondents organization is also false. The allegations that the complainant has incurred Rs. 5,000/- towards taxi charges from Gooty, Tadipatri is also false. The allegations in para – 3 of the complaint that the Gooty Railway Station is situated far away to Gooty Town and there are no proper road transportation facilities from Gooty Railway station to other town is false.   The allegations that the respondents left the passengers to their fate at the odd hours without providing alternative arrangements and that they fail to render service properly and that it shows negligence on their part and the complainant and his family members suffered mentally and physically apart from financial loss etc., are all false and invented for the purpose of this case. There is no negligence on the part of the respondents. The respondents stated that the complainant along with his family members boarded Venkatasri Express on 27-11-2009 at Kachiguda. The train left at 20.00 hours from Kachiguda and the said train supposed to reach Kadapa around 4.30 a.m on 28-11-2009. The entire journey starts and ends in the night and the train reached Gooty Railway station at 2.30 hours on 28-11-2009. On 28-11-2009 the goods train derailment took place at Krishnapuram at 01.15 hours, on account of this derailment the train No. 2797 (Venkatadri Express) was diverted via Gooty, Dharmavaram, Krishnarajapuram and Jolarpet Junction to Chittoor. In this connection the following arrangements were made at Gooty Railway Station for the traveling public (1) Public announcements were made every 10 mts. For the traveling public at Gooty Railway Station about, the Venkatadri Express will be diverted from Gooty to Chittoor via Ananthapur and arrangement of refunds to the desirous passengers who wish to terminate their journey at Gooty itself, 2) Two APSRTC busses were arranged by 6.00 hours on 28-11-2009 for transportation, of passengers between Gooty – Kadapa – Renigutla, 3) Refund of fare (un-traveled portion) were arranged at booking office, Gooty 470 passengers have availed refund to the tune of Rs. 22,673/- 4) It is true that as stated by the station authorities   at Gooty, VIPs like Sri Sai Pratap, Hon’ble Central Minister and Smt. Galla Aruna Kumari, Hon’ble A.P. State Minister were also traveling by the same train on that day. Sri Saipratap, Hon’ble Central Minister made his own arrangements and Smt. Galla Aruna Kumari, Hon’ble State Minister preferred to travel by the same train via Dharmavaram – Krishnarajapuram. 5) APSRTC Buses arrived to Gooty Station around 06.00 hours but no passengers were available as all have availed refund and went away. 6) APSRTC busses waited till 6.30 hours and after the departure of train No. 2797 express, since no passenger were there to board buses. Hence, they were cancelled and returned to depot. The allegations made by the complainant that the complainant and family members waited till 7.00 a.m at Gooty Railway Station and reached Tadipatri town through taxi on hire and traveled from Tadipatri to Kadapa incurred Rs. 5,000/- towards taxi charges are not connected to the Railways and the respondents are no way responsible for this expenditure.  The Railways provided maximum facilities to the traveling public as stated above but the complainant not utilized the services provided by the Railways.    He has made his own arrangements and went to Kadapa. He neither approached to receive refund of fare nor utilized bus services provided by the Railways.  The personal expense incurred by the complainant is not connected to the Railways, as such the Railway is not liable to pay compensation and interest. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the respondents. The respondents requested to dismiss the complaint with costs in the interest of justice. 

 

4.                 On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination. 

i.                   Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief’s as prayed for?

ii.                 Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the respondents?

iii.              To what relief?

 

5.                On behalf of the complainant Ex. A1 to A4 were marked and no exhibits were filed and marked on behalf of the Respondents. Oral arguments were heard from both sides.    

 

6.                Point No. 1& 2.  Ex. A1 is the Photostat copy of electronic reservation slip pertaining to Aditya, Swati and Sandhya family members of the complainant vide PNR No. 13463638265 for the journey on 27-11-2009 by train No. 2797 (Venkatadri Express) from Kachiguda to Kadapa and the total fare is Rs. 3,045/-. Ex. A2 is the Photostat copy of electronic reservation slip pertaining to the complainant vide PNR No. 1243849027, dt. 27-11-2009 from Kachiguda – Kadapa by (Venkatadri Express) train  No. 2797 and the fare was Rs. 590/-. Ex. A3 is the Photostat copy of legal notice dt. 20-1-2010 issued to both respondents by the counsel of the complainant. Ex. A4 are two postal receipt Nos. 2991 &2992 sent to R1 and R2 on 20-1-2010 and postal acknowledgement card received from R2. 

 

7.                As could be seen from the documentary evidence coupled with oral arguments advanced by the counsels of both sides it is a fact that the complainant along with his family members booked 2^nd class A/c railway tickets for their journey from Kachiguda to Kadapa on 27-11-2009 by train No. 2797 (Venkatadri Express).   On account of derailment of a goods train at Krishnapuram situated in the outskirts on Kadapa Railway station, the Venkatadri Express which was scheduled to arrive Kadapa Railway Station on 28-11-2009 at 4.30 a.m reached Gooti Railway Station at about 2.30 a.m on 28-11-2009 and stopped. According to the complainant the railway authorities not made any arrangements for their onward journey from Gooty Railway station to Kadapa. The counter filed by the respondents stating that in the same train VIP’s namely Sri Saipratap, Hon’ble Central Minister and Smt. Galla Arunakumari, Hon’ble State Minister were also traveling in the same train on that day and that Sri Sai Pratap made his own arrangements to go to his destination, Whereas Smt. Galla Arunakumari preferred to travel by the same train via Dharmavaram, Krishnarajapuram. This is uncalled reference by the respondents in their counter. Smt. Galla Aruna Kumari has to traveled upto Tirupati so she might have preferred to travel by train via Dharmavaram, Krishnarajpuram to reach Tirupati. Sri Sai Pratap opted to make his own arrangements to go to his destination i.e. Kadapa. If the train is diverted via Dharmavaram, Krishnarajpuram, katpadi etc., the passengers who are bound to travel to Tirupati and Chittoor and enroute are alone benefited. The diversion of the train from Gooty to Tirupati via Dharamavaram, Krishnarajpuram and Katpadi definitely is not useful to the complainant and his family members because their destination is at Kadapa in a different direction. Even if they travel by the train which was diverted via Dharmavaram it will not reach Kadapa.   This train will reach either Chittoor or Tirupati.  So the arrangements made by the respondent officials who diverted the train in different directions is not at all helpful to the complainant and his family members to reach their destination. The other arrangements alleged to have been made by the officials of the respondents i.e. making announcements for refund, arranging the RTC Bus etc. is off the record.   There is no proof on record because no documents are filed by the respondents that refund was given to the passengers including the complainant and family members. Similarly the alleged arrangements of two RTC buses by the Railway Authorities were returned to its depot as no passengers was available to board the said buses that gives an impression that the RTC buses alleged to have been arranged by the staff of the respondents might have reached Gooti railway station after the departure of all the passengers from Gooti railway Station in different modes. 

 

8.                There is no enmity in between the complainant and the respondents. There is no need for the complainant who is a senior citizen and a respectable practicing doctor at Kadapa for the past 35 years. The complainant was accompanied by his wife, who was working as a Lecturer having very good social status aged about 56 years. His daughter aged 32 years, who was carrying advanced stage of pregnancy and his son – in – law aged 37 years a Software Engineer.  Really they might have suffered a lot at Gooty Railway Station in odd hours during night times. Definitely the complainant and his family members might have suffered a lot in procuring a taxi because the Gooty Railway Station is far way to Gooty town. One has to go into Gooty town from Gooty Railway Station to catch or engage a taxi. Necessarily the complainant and his family members including his daughter who was in advance state of pregnancy with their respectivle luggages forced to walk a long distance from Gooty Railway Station to Gooty Town. After reaching Tadipatri their own vehicle came from Kadapa and that they shifted into their own vehicle and reached their destination i.e. Kadapa at about 1.00 p.m. on 28-11-2009.   There is no reason to disbelieve the words of the complainant at any angle. On the other hand the respondents failed to produce any piece of document in support of their contention. One S. Lakshmanna, Station Manager, S.C. Railway, Gooty filed his affidavit on behalf of the opposite parties. The contents of the said affidavit is nothing but the duplica of the counter of the respondents. Since he is not the party to the proceedings, there is no need to consider this affidavit. If really the staff of respondents behaved in an orderly manner / convincing manner to the complainant and his family members, had they arranged alternative arrangements as alleged there is no need for the complainant and his family members to walk from the Railway Station to the long distance Gooty town carrying their own luggage for getting a taxi in the odd hours during the night times. There appears to be no truth in the contention of the respondents and they thoroughly failed to file any documents to support their contention. The complainant deserves consideration in his favour. The complainant claimed compensation of Rs. 90,000/- towards mentally agony and physical strain. Reasonably this compensation can be considered and an amount of  Rs. 8,985/- towards fare charges of the complainant, his family members towards taxi etc., needs to be included in the compensation of Rs. 90,000/-.  Hence, the points are answered accordingly. 

 

9.                Point No. 3 In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the Respondents jointly and severally liable to pay Rs. 90,000/- (Rupees Ninety Thousand Only) towards compensation for mental and physical strain caused to the complainant and his family members along with interest @ 9% p.a. from 28-11-2009 till the date of realization and to pay an amount of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs of the complaint, payable within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. 

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 7^th July 2010

 

 

 

 

Witnesses examined.

For Complainant    NIL                                           For Respondent :         NIL

 

Exhibits marked for Complainant : -  

 

Ex. A1         P/c of electronic reservation slip PNR No. 13463638265, Dt. 27-11-2009.

Ex. A2         P/c of electronic reservation slip PNR No. 1243849027, dt. 27-11-2009.

Ex. A3         P/c of legal notice dt. 20-1-2010 to both respondents from counsel of the complainant, dt. 21-1-2010.

Ex. A4         Two postal receipt Nos. 2991 &2992 sent to R1 and R2 on 20-1-2010

and postal acknowledgement card received from R2. 

 

Exhibits marked for Respondents: - 

 

                             1) Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate for complainant.

2) Sri K. Guru Murthy, Advocate for Respondents.  

 

 

2) Copy was dispatched on      :

3) Copy of delivered to parties :