Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/73/2018

L.Devaraj - Complainant(s)

Versus

The General Manager Southern Railway - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.K.B.Vivekanathan

25 May 2022

ORDER

Complaint presented on  :25.06.2018    Date of disposal               :25.05.2022

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (NORTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

 

                   PRESENT : THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,                         :PRESIDENT

                                         TMT. KAVITHA KANNAN, M.E.,                         : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.73/2018

 

DATED THIS WEDNESDAY THE 25^th   DAY OF MAY 2022

 

1.  L.Devaraj,

2. A. Balajee Kumar,

 No.59, Nehru Nagar,

Villivakkam, Chennai-600 049.

                                                                                                           .. Complainants.                                                                        ..Vs..

 

The General Manager,

Southern Railway,

Southern Railway Buildings,

Chennai-600 003.

                                                                       ..  Opposite party.

 Counsel for the complainants                      : M/s. K.B. Vivekananthan,   

                                                                        S.Magimairaj and M.Shanmugam,

Counsel for opposite party                         : Mr. K. Muthamil Rala.

 

ORDER

THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L., PRESIDENT

          This complaint has been filed by the complainants against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to directing the Opposite party to refund the entire Train Ticket Fare in PNR Nos.475-4323200 and 454-6702255 and to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards the compensation for undergoing distress, mental agony, mental anxiety and undue hardship and a sum of  Rs.1,000/- being the cost of the notice totaling Rs.2,01,000/- and to pay the cost of complaint.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant submitted that they booked their return journey ticket from Madurai Junction to Chennai Egmore in PNR Nos.475-4323200 and 454-6702255 to travel on 29.10.2017 in Train No.12638 in Pandian Express and S-10 coach was allotted to complainant and eight other persons in the said express Train.  The complainant stated that accordingly on 29.10.2017, they boarded in the Pandian Express Train at 20.30hrs at Madurai.  The Train was about to be departed at 20.35hrs from Madurai Junction.  To their shock and surprise, all the lights and fans were not working in S-10 coach of Pandian Express.  Immediately, the complainants contacted the TTE and informed about the fault in the S-10 coach requested him to make arrangements for rectifying the same prior to the train departs. The TTE replied the complainants that the fault would be looked into.  However, to their shock and dismay, the train departed without rectifying the fault from Madurai Junction.  The Complainants stated that the 1^st complainant and one Mr.Prabakaran, one of their co-passengers suffered very lot. The complainant further stated that due to the darkness in the S-10 coach the passengers were not able to move freely.  The complainant stated that due to sultry and humid atmosphere within the coach, all of them were feeling discomfort and could not sleep.  Complainant reported to TTE, he assured that there were electricians in the train who would attend the fault very soon.  But, no one attended the fault the train reached the Dindugal Railway station.  Some technicians attend the fault and the lights were switched on, but could not rectify the fault of the fans. The train departed from Dindugal Railway station again the lights went off. Again the complainants met the TTE and complained the same.  The TTE informed the same to the control room of the Southern Railway and assured that they are rectify the fault.  Some technicians attended the fault in Trich Railway Station. When the complainants enquired with the technicians, they had informed that the fault is existing for the past two months. The technicians further informed that the fault could not be resolved unless the coach was not taken to the Railway shed. However the technicians switched on the lights but could not resolve the fault of fans. The complainants stated that when the train reached virudachalam Railway station they got down and reached  the train guard and asked for the complaint book.  The guard refused the same. The opposite party issued legal notice on 10.11.2017 for refund of the ticket fare along with Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and physical discomfort during travel and for the same deficiency in service. The complainant stated that the electricity fault in S-10 coach of the Pandiyan Express left unattended for the past two months as such the opposite party made deficiency in serviceand hence the complaint.

2.WRITTEN VERSION  FILED BY OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

The opposite party submitted that as far as para 6 complaint is concerned as our electrical staff entered S10 coach immediately opened the four doorways to allow the natural air coach inside., found that coaches are illuminating with dim light situation since emergency light were working.  With the help of emergency light our electrical staffs have started attending the failures and the coach TTE able to check/clear the tickets simultaneously.  Since it was the end of October month approaching the winter season so the natural air itself holds sufficient moisture so uneasiness and sweating not prevailed inside the coach. But, the complainants group with alcoholic drunken state not satisfied and adamantly occupied the space near by the door way where electrical panels are located, and keep on asking queries a quarrelling with electrical staff not able to trace the fault in free mind.  But the complainants not known since our electrical staffs are working high voltage 750 VAC system.  So sultry and discomfort not prevailed inside the coach as like/similar to the bus transport journey.  When train reaching the Trichy station at 23.10 hrs Madurai division on duty electrical controller had informed to Trichy division Electrical controller in advance to give attention to provide through feeding cable to S10 coach.  After ten minutes the lights have become dimmed light condition and fan speeds also came down and slow running.  Immediately S10 coach negative fuse removed to cut battery load then power supply extended from S9 coach to S10 coach with through feeding cable through vestibule area to S10 coach for one light circuit only which consume 3.4 A only.  Power supply extended from S9 coach L1 light circuit through FDB (Fuse Distribution Box) to S10 coach, but the fuse rating provided in L1 Lights circuit is 16 A as shown. On receipt of the complaint, he did his best to restore power in the S10 coach till the end.  A copy of the statement made by the captain is enclosed for reference.  One Senior Section Engineer Name M. Madasamy given technical instructions to their Technician in the whole night and monitor the coach condition.  From Madurai station on wards one Senior Technician in train lighting;- Name- A Manikandan Two technician, Grade-1 S.Karupanan and S.Negendran accompanied the S10 coach from Madurai to Chennai Egmore.  Two electrical controllers Name Mathura Vani Bhai and T.Ganesan conveyed the message to technician and to Sr DEE/Madurai and SSE/TL/Madurai on the whole night about the condition of the coach.  Emergency lights were working with low illumination and night lamp also working.  Electricity supply to S10 coach was extended from S9 coach to one light circuit only which contains only 13 lights including night lamp.  The opposite party submitted that complainants unlawfully prevented the staff of opposite party from carrying out repair work as they were under the influence the alcohol.  They were acted in a high handed manner and disturbed other passengers also by their conduct.  Though the opposite party has taken prompt steps to rectify the defects in lightning and fans they were prevented by the complainants due to their intoxication.  There was no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party as such the complainant is not entitled for any compensation.  Since the complainants have travelled from Madurai to Chennai they cannot any refund of entire train ticket fare.

3.Points for consideration

1.  Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?.
2. Whether the complainants are entitled to the reliefs prayed?  To what extent?

4.Point NO.1.

The complainants and 8 other persons booked a return journey tickets with PNR no475-4323200 and 454-6702255. To travel on 29.10.2017 in train no.12638 Pandian express and S-10 coach was allotted to them.  According to the complainants when they boarded the train at Madurai at 20.30 hrs the train was about to be departed at 20.35 hrs but to their surprise all the lights and fans in s-10 coach were not working  which was informed to the TTE the complainant and others felt sweating and uneasiness due to the same.  And due to darkness they were not able to move freely and reach lavatory and without air they were not able to sleep and at Dindigul railway station some technicians attended a fault and lights were switched on but could not rectify fan after sometime again the lights went off.  When the train reached Trichy again some technician attended  the fault for Half an hour in Trichy.  However, only the lights alone switched on but not the fans.  Again the complainants informed the same to the captain of the train one Karunakaran and he did not give proper reply and hence it was reported the guard inspite of it but the guard give failed to complaint book and further due to the deficiency in the service the complainants were put to mental agony and travelled discomfortably for nine hours and reached Chennai.  Therefore the complainants prayed to refund the train ticket fare and also Rs.2 lakhs for mental agony and for cost.

5. But on the other hand the opposite party contended that  the defect in the light and fan were reported belatedly just before departure and hence could not be attended before departure and further contended that on complaint immediately the electrical staff entered s-10 coach opened the door ways for entry of natural air and found that emergency lights was working with dim light and since it was Oct month during night hours there was free flow of air and there was no sweating as alleged in the complaint.  Further it is stated that the complainants group consumed alcohol and being in drunken state they quarreled with the electrical staff who tried to trace out the fault and later the lights were put on and arrangement was made on to give power from S-9 coach and lights alone could be provided since the running of fan also will consume over load and thereby cause fuse in both coaches and hence contended that the fault was attended by the electrical staff and except the complainants no other passengers complained regarding the same and further contended that the electricians on that day travelled from Madurai to Chennai and to prove the same the report given by the technician were also marked by the opposite party.  The opposite party stated  that they have taken prompt steps to rectify the defects  and since the complainants travelled from Madurai to Chennai they cannot seek for refund of entire train fare.

6. Complainants filed proof affidavit filed E.A1 to A4 were marked on complainant side and Opposite party filed proof affidavit Ex.B1 to B5 were marked on the opposite party side.

7. It is found from Ex.A1 and A2 that the total number of passengers in the two tickets were twelve but in the complaint it is alleged that totally 10 persons including the complainants booked the ticket.  The other passengers were not added as parties to this proceeding.  But the prayer is to refund the entire train fare including the other passengers who are not parties to this complaint and hence, the complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties.  For Ex.A3 legal notice the opposite party has given A4 reply stating that intensive efforts were made by the electrical staff to rectify the defects and on arrival at Chennai Egmore the defective part was also replaced.  It is found from Ex.B1 and B2 that the train lightning was examined by the technical staff on the date of journey as well as on prior dates and prior to departure there was no electrical fault in the train as found in Ex.B1 and B2.  But electrical faults may occur at any time which cannot be predicted by any person.  The report given by the three technicians who attended the defects on 29.10.2017 which were marked Ex.B3 to B5 shows that every attempt was made by the opposite party to set right the functioning the light and fan that too when the train was moving.  The said train was admittedly a super fast train and stopping of train for the purpose of rectifying the electrical defect in a single coach will affect the journey of entire passengers in that train.   Even as per the version of complainants the attempt to rectify the defects was made by the opposite party while the train was in running and also for half an hour at Trichy railway station.  Which prove that there is no willful negligence or deficiency  on the part of the opposite party.   The decision relied by the complainant reported in Ghaziabad Development authority Vs Balbir singh  is not applicable to the facts of the present case.  It is alleged by the opposite party that the complainants being advocates disturbed the staff who were attending the faults by taking the laws in their hands and quarreled with the staff and further contended that the inspite of best efforts taken by the opposite party for safe and convenient travel of the passengers the above complaint is filed only to have  unjust enrichment and alleged that the complaint is an abuse of process of law.  The complainants failed to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party as alleged in the complaint.  As already stated this complaint which is filed onbehalf of eight other passengers having same interest ought to have been filed in a representative capacity by filing necessary application under the relevant provisions of the Consumer Protection Act which is not done by the complainant. Ex.B1 to B5 prove the facts that there was night lamp with minimum light which is sufficient during the night hours journey.  The contention to the contrary in the complaint is found to be devoid of merits.  Further there is no proof to show that the electricity fault in S-10 coach was left unattended  for the past two months in the light of Ex.B1 to B5.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Point no.1 is answered accordingly.

8. Point No.2:-

Based on findings given to Point no.1 since there was no deficiency in service the complainants are not entitled for either refund of train fare or compensation for mental agony as claimed in the complaint. Hence, the complaint is dismissed, no cost.

          In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No costs.     

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-Typist taken down, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 25^th day of May 2022.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                         PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1	29.10.2017	Train Tickets in PNR No.475-4323200
Ex.A2	29.10.2017	Train Tickets in PNR No.454-6702255
Ex.A3	10.11.2017	Legal notice with RPAD receipt.
Ex.A4	25.01.2018	Reply by the opposite party

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE  OPPOSITE PARTY:

Ex.B1	17.10.2017, 21.10.2017, 25.10.2017, 29.10.2017	Trip Examination Check list.
Ex.B2	29.10.2017	Single Train Monitoring
Ex.B3	29.10.2017	Report given by Sr.Tech/TL/MDU Mr.A.Manikandan
Ex.B4	29.10.2017	Report given by Tech/Gr-1/MDU Mr.S.Karupanan
Ex.B5	29.10.2017	Report given by Tech/Gr-1/MDU Mr.S.Nagendran

 

MEMBER – I                                                                         PRESIDENT