Complaint filed on: 09-01-2017             

Disposed on: 19-07-2017

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM,

OLD DC OFFICE COMPOUND, TUMAKURU-572 101

CC.No.05/2017

DATED THIS THE 19^th DAY OF JULY 2017

PRESENT

SMT.PRATHIBHA. R.K. BAL, LLM, PRESIDENT

SMT.GIRIJA, B.A., LADY MEMBER

Complainant: -

                                            Kum.Swathi.S,               

D/o. G.Sreepathi,

Aged about 24 years,

R/o. Maruthi Krupa, 4^th Main Road, S.M.Nagara,

S.S.Puram post,

Tumakuru-572 102

(By advocate Sri.G.Sreepathi)

V/s

Opposite parties:-    

1. The General Manger/Controller,

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Central Office, Transport House, KH Road, Bengaluru -27, Karnataka, India

2. The Central Manager/D.C.,

Karnataka State Road, Transport Corporation, Tumakuru Division, Tumakuru

3. The Central Manager/Divisional Controller, Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, Kolar Division, Kolar.

(OP No.1 –Exparte)

(OP No.2 and 3-by advocate Sri.K.S.Puttaraju)

ORDER

SMT.PRATHIBHA. R.K. PRESIDENT

This complaint is filed by the complainant against the OP No.1 to 3, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. The complainant prays to direct the OPs to pay back the difference amount of Rs.652=00 along with interest at 12% interest from the date of booking of the tickets and to pay Rs.15,000=00 towards compensation, Rs.15,000=00 towards damages and Rs.5,000=00 towards and cost and Rs.2,000=00 towards legal notice charges.

2. The brief facts of the complaint is as under.

          The complainant submitted that, on 9-12-2016 the complainant had booked 4 seats through online at about 11.28 a.m. The details are as follows, PNR No.J61940657, Date of journey: 11-12-2016 (Sunday), Trip Code: 2059BNGSRS, Class of Service: Karnataka Vaibhav, Seat No.15, 16, 21 and 22, Service start place: Bengaluru, Passenger Start Place: Tumakuru, Service end place: Sirsi, Boarding Point: Tumakuru, Departure Time: 22-15, Platform No. …., Txn Password: 0200, Passenger End place: Sirsi, Alighting Point: Sirsi, old Bus Stand, No. of seats: 4 (four) (Adults: 4) and (Children: 0), Passenger information are;

Total fare details: Basic Fare: 1,460=00, Reservation Fee: 40=00, Concession Fee: 76=00, Service Tax: 0-0, Levies: 168=00, Total Fare Rs.1,668=00 (Incl. of Reservation fee Rs.40=00). The OPs have not showed any Enroute refreshment stops and they have left the said column as blank. 

          The complainant further submitted that, after booking of the ticket for the seats in the said bus by the complainant, the amount has been immediately credited to OP’s account. On 11-12-2016, the OPs have sent a message to the complainant that the service is cancelled by mentioning PNR number and trip code, departure date and time of the said bus without mentioning any reason for not making alternative arrangements. Hence, the said act clearly shows that, the OP’s are negligent in booking of the tickets and cancelled the tickets abruptly without making any alternative arrangement or adjusting the said seat/tickets with some other bus.  The complainant further submitted that, the complainant has failed to make journey on the said date since she did and not get the seats in any other buses. This act of the OPs, the complainant has faced sercvie deficiency and mental agony.

          The complainant further submitted that, due to their urgency only, the complainant booked ticket through OP’s corporation by spending more money in Karnataka Vaibhav
Bus. After booking the bus tickets, the OPs have cancelled the said service of the bus and sent the message to the complainant. Due to negligent act of the OPs, the complainant has faced service deficiency and mental agony.

          The complainant further submitted that, the OP has not mentioned any platform number in the E-ticket issued by the OP except boarding point as Tumakuru. The complainant struggled very much to get the seats booked in other bus and ultimately booked in Vijay Anand Road Lines Bus by paying Rs.2,200=00 for four seats and they have incurred extra auto fare of Rs.120=00 in total Rs.652=00 extra amount. The extra expense was incurred by the complainant due to negligent act of the OPs. In this regard, the complainant issued legal notice to the OPs and the same were served on the OPs. Hence the present complaint is filed.        

3. After service of the notice, the 1^st OP did not appear before the forum and he was called out absent and he was placed exparte. The OP No.2 and 3 have appeared through their counsel and filed common objections.

4. In the objection, the OP No.2 and 3 submitted that, the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts and it is liable to be dismissed in limine. The averments made in the complaint are all hereby denied as false and baseless. .

The OP No.2 and 3 further submitted that, on 11-12-2016, Karnataka Vaibhava Bus which was about to be operated on that date had developed a complaint in the break retarder. The Depot Manager was not able to repair the bus and he has informed AWATAR Section and as well as Kempegowda Bus Station courter that Karnataka Vaibhava Service from Bengaluru to Sirisi will not be operated on 11-12-2016.  The departure time was scheduled in Bengaluru is at 21.00 hours. The Depot Manager has informed the non-operation of the service well in advance in the early morning. The Awatar counter has informed to Kum.Swathi regarding the non-operation of the service through SMS in advance at 8.52 a.m. on 11-12-2016.  

The OP No.2 and 3 further submitted that, the terms and conditions will apply if they wish to use the KSRTC’s Website or mobile booking service offered through the KSRTC Website. No user can register more than once on the site. Once they register themselves on the KSRTC site they are deemed to have agreed to the terms and conditions. Once they have continued with I agree button at the bottom of terms and conditions at Login page, they have entered into a formal agreement with KSRTC for the purpose of transactions on this website. If the service is cancelled by KSRTC (or other STUS) for operational reasons refund applicable will be made to the concerned card/online banking accounts only as well as E-ticket should be cancelled by user himself.

The OP No.2 and 3 further submitted that, as per the operational issues, the terms and conditions for grievance/refund claims in respect of reasons like bus cancelled, bus break down changing class of service, bus did not pick up passenger at pickup point, complaints against the operating crew/counter staff, booking agents etc. passengers are requested to send e-mail along with ticket details and grievance to Awatar @ KSRTC.org (AWATAR section) in such cases the eligible amount will be refundable to concerned account only, no physical cash transaction is admitted.

The OP No.2 and 3 further submitted that, the complainant did not seeking the refund amount, the KSRTC reserves the rights to cancel or alter the service which has been very well printed on the back of the PNR tickets. The Karnataka Vaibhava Bus service was cancelled by the corporation due to operational reason i.e. break retarder. On 11-12-2017, the same is intimated through the SMS to the complainant at about 8.52 a.m. and the amount also made refund to the complainant. As per the terms and conditions of the reservation agreement, the corporation reserves the right to cancel or alter the service which has been made due to operational reasons, hence it is not come under deficiency of service.

The OP No.2 and 3 further submitted that, the complaint filed under section 12 of the CP Act, but this complaint with respect to service under section 13 (2) of the CP Act. It is not come under the definition class of service under section 2 (o) services. It does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service. The reservation is made upon the personal contract or agreement with certain terms and conditions; it is purely under the contract of personal service. Therefore, this complaint is not come within the definition of service of the said Act. Hence the complaint is not maintainable and deficiency of sercvie does not arise and there is no cause of action for the complaint. Hence, the OP no.2 and 3 have prayed to dismiss the complaint with cost, in the interest of justice and equity.

5.  In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the complainant and OPs have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version.   The complainant has produced documents, which were marked as Ex-C1 to C9. The OPs have produced the documents, which were marked as Ex-R1 and R2. Both parties have filed their written arguments. We have heard the arguments of both parties and perused the documents of both parties and posted the case for order.

6. Based on the above materials, the following points will arise for our consideration.

1. Whether the complainant is a consumer under the CP Act?
2. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs as alleged by the complainant?
3. What Order?  

7. Our findings on the above points are;

          Point no.1: In the Negative

          Point no.2: Does not arise  

          Point no.3: As per the final order below.

REASONS

          8. Point No.1 to 3: On perusal of the pleadings, materials submitted by both the parties, it is found out that, the complainant had booked four seats through online at about 11.38 a.m. on 9-12-2016. The details of the bus are hereunder:

“PNR No.J61940657, Date of journey: 11-12-2016 (Sunday), Trip Code: 2059BNGSRS, Class of Service: Karnataka Vaibhav, Seat No.15, 16, 21 and 22, Service start place: Bengaluru, Passenger Start Place: Tumakuru, Service end place: Sirsi, Boarding Point: Tumakuru, Departure Time: 22-15, Platform No. …., Txn Password: 0200, Passenger End place: Sirsi, Alighting Point: Sirsi, old Bus Stand, No. of seats: 4 (four) (Adults: 4) and (Children: 0), Passenger information are;

Total fare details: Basic Fare: 1,460=00, Reservation Fee: 40=00, Concession Fee: 76=00, Service Tax: 0-0, Levies: 168=00, Total Fare Rs.1,668=00 (Incl. of Reservation fee Rs.40=00)”. Based on booking made, it is found out that; complainant was not scheduled to travel in the said bus which she had booked on 9-1-2016. It is her case that, she had booked in favour of four persons by paying requisite fee to the OPs. The complainant cannot have any grievance against the OPs regarding deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Since, she was not scheduled to travel in the said bus at all. Hence, she cannot step into the shoes as a complainant alleging deficiency against the OPs. The complainant cannot be termed as an “Aggrieved person”. Only a aggrieved person shall have a legal and statutory right to file a complaint under the CP Act for infringement of her/his right. Hence the complainant not being a aggrieved person cannot enforced her right. Further, she does not have locus-standi to file a complaint before the forum.

          9. Secondly, nowhere in the record, it is found that any authorization was given to the complainant to represent the case before the forum. Hence, in the absence of any authorization by    1) Janhavi, 42 years 2) Lakshmi, 39 years 3) Manjunath, 43 years and 4) Kuppayya, 62 years in whose behalf the tickets were booked, the complainant cannot be defined as a consumer. Accordingly we answered point no.1 in the negative and point no.2 does not arise for our consideration. In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant is hereby dismissed. No costs.

          Supply free copy of this order to both parties. 

          (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open forum on this, the 19^th day of July 2017).

LADY MEMBER                                         PRESIDENT