Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

202/2014

F.V.Jayasudha, W/o.Franee Vijay,Female age-32, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Managing Director,Red Bus, - Opp.Party(s)

S.Petehi Muthu Kumar,

12 Jan 2017

ORDER

                                                            Complaint presented on:  02.09.2014

                                                                Order pronounced on:  12.01.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

THURSDAY THE 12^th    DAY OF JANUARY 2017

C.C.NO.202/2014

F.V.Jayashudha,

W/o France Vijay,

Female, Age:-32,

No.39, 1^st Main Road,

V.G.P.Selva Nagar,

Velachery, Chennai – 600 042.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

..Vs..

1. The Managing Director,

Red Bus,

No.311, 7^th Cross, 3^rd Main Domlur Layout,

Bangalore – 560 071.

2. The Managing Director,

The Universal Travels,

No.70, Majestic Complex,

Omni Bus Stand Thiruvalluvar Street,

Koyambedu,

Chennai – 600 107.

Date of complaint                                 : 24.10.2014

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.S.Petchi Muthukumar,

                                                                S.Suresh Kumar

Counsel for   1^st opposite Party               : Fox Mandal & Associates

Counsel for   2^nd Opposite Party               : Ex - parte

O R D E R

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant had booked 4 tickets in Air Conditioned, Volvo Bus from Chennai to Cuddalore through the 1^st Opposite Party web site for travel on 28.05.2014 to attend a marriage function along with her family in the 2^nd Opposite Party bus.The bus was scheduled to start at 6.30 a.m from Thiruvanmiyur and each ticket costing to Rs.450/- totaling to Rs.1,900/- along with delivery charges and the tickets were delivered by one Mr.Idayathulla who is working under the 2^nd Opposite Party and who had received the cash on behalf of the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Party. The seat numbers were allotted in the said ticket as 12,13,15 and 16 when the Complainant reached the place of boarding for departure around 6.15 a.m and waited for very long time and no one to inform even that the bus was late and she had patiently waited and around 7.30 a.m, she was shocked to see that a non A/C substandard bus  of the 2^nd Opposite Party  had come and when the Complainant had objected and stated that she had booked for the Air Conditioned Volvo Bus, but there was no response from the 2^nd Opposite Party and since the Complainant had to attend the marriage, they were forced to go in the non A/C bus and they had travelled in the non A/C bus under protest. She had contacted the 1^st Opposite Party and asked why she was not provided with the Air Conditioned, Volvo Bus and the 1^st Opposite Party had replied stating that the Air Conditioned, Volvo Bus was under repair and when the Complainant had asked for refund of fare which is the difference between the A/C and non A/C  bus. The 1^st Opposite Party had stated that the Complainant had to collect the same from Koyambedu after three days and after three days the Complainant had gone to Koyambedu and asked about the refund, but there was no response from the person in charge and he had acted in an indifferent way. When the Complainant had tried to ask some more clarifications the Opposite Party staff had shouted back and sent the Complainant out of the premises. She had travelled in the non A/C substandard bus and she was not able to reach the place in time and the bus seating was not comfortable and she had got heavy back pain and her marriage plan with her family was totally ruined by the confusion made by the 1^st & 2^nd Opposite Party. She also took efforts and registered a formal e-mail Complaint with the 1^st Opposite Party through her spouse vide Complaint number 10731134 dated 30.05.2014 there is no response till now. After several reminders she received an e-mail dated 15.06.2014 stating “since the customer has travelled, she is not eligible for refund”. The Complainant had sent a legal notice to the Opposite Parties on 26.07.2014 and the Opposite Party received the same and the 2^nd Opposite Party refused to receive the notice. The acts of the Opposite Parties amounts to Deficiency in Service and thereby caused mental agony to the Complainant. Hence the Complainant filed this Complaint  for compensation for mental agony and to refund the cost of the ticket amount of Rs.1,900 with cost of the Complaint.

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE 1^st  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF

          The 1^st Opposite Party is neither a proper nor a necessary party to the instant Complaint. There is no privity of contract between the Complainant and the Managing Director with regard to purchase of any ticket and as such the Complaint is liable to be dismissed against the 1^st Opposite Party. Further, it is submitted that ‘Redbus’ is not at all a legal entity. It is merely a brand name used by ‘Pilani Soft Labs Pvt. Ltd’ which is a private Limited Company registered under the companies Act, 1956 and Pilani soft labs private limited operates under the trade name ‘Redbus’ and operates primarily through its website www.redbus.in’ . The Complainant has not arrayed ‘pilani Soft Labs Private Limited’ as a party to the instant Complaint and as such the Complaint is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties. There is no cause of action against the Managing  Director for the sole  reason being the Complainant  did not purchase any ticket from the Managing Director. The 1^st Opposite Party states that it is an online ticketing portal which facilitates purchase of tickets for consumers through its website ‘www.redbus.in’. It is submitted that the 1^st Opposite Party is only a ticketing portal for the principal viz. the 2^nd Opposite Party herein.  The 1^st Opposite Party received a request from the Complainant for the purchase of a bus ticket to travel from Chennai to Cuddalore on 28.05.2014. The 1st Opposite Party upon receipt of the request booked a valid ticket for the Complainant to travel from Chennai to Cuddalore in a bus owned and operated by the 2^nd Opposite Party. The Complainant did not pay any amount through the 1^st Opposite Party. The money for the ticket was paid directly to the 2^nd Opposite Party’s representative. As per the booking, the Complainant was allotted 4 seats in the bus owned and operated by the 2^nd Opposite Party. It was informed to the 1^st Opposite Party that the Volvo bus which was scheduled to travel had broken down/under repair and that alternate travel arrangements had been made by the 2^nd Opposite Party. The Complainant on that day traveled from Chennai to Cuddalore in the alternate travel arrangements diligently made by the 2^nd Opposite Party. The Complainant husband sent an e-mail 30.05.2014 to the 1^st Opposite Party requesting for refund of the tickets charges.  The 1^st Opposite Party customer support diligently acted open e-mail as per the terms and conditions and also on account of good will initiated refund of Rs.400/- on 07.06.2014 which was collected by the Complainant from the head office of the 2^nd Opposite Party.  The relation between the 1^st Opposite Party and the 2^nd Opposite Party is that of an Agent & Principal is a contract of agency. As per the principle of contract, the Agent acts for and on behalf of the principal. It is submitted that the responsibilities of the 1^st Opposite Party are limited as per its terms and conditions which are printed on the ticket itself. As per the terms and conditions of the 1^st Opposite Party condition No.4 in case the bus operator   change the type of bus due to some reason, the Red Bus will refund the differential  amount to the customer in 24 hours of the journey. Accordingly in this case this Opposite Party had already refunded the differential amount and therefore this Opposite Party has not any Deficiency in Service and prays to dismiss the Complaint with cost.

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

4. POINT NO :1 

          The admitted facts  are that the Complainant booked 4 tickets in Air Conditioned, Volvo Bus to travel from Chennai to Cuddalore on 28.05.2014 to attend a marriage function through the 1^st Opposite Party web-site Red Bus on line to travel in the 2^nd Opposite Party   bus and each tickets costing Rs.450/- totally he paid a sum of Rs.1,900/- to one Mr.Idayathulla  who is working under the 2^nd Opposite Party delivered the tickets to the Complainant and collected  the amount and in the said bus the seat Nos.11,12,15 & 16 were allotted and the Complainant and his persons  were waiting to pick-up the bus, instead of Air Conditioned, Volvo Bus only non A/C bus has come and they travelled  in the said  bus in order to attend the marriage at Cuddalore is a necessity  and the said tickets is marked as Ex.A1.

          5. The 2^nd Opposite Party remained absent and set ex – parte.

          6. The  1^st Opposite Party admits that the Complainant booked 4 tickets to  travel in a  Volvo A/C bus and however the 2^nd Opposite Party sent only  a non A/C  bus and through the said bus, the Complainant and others were travelled.

          7. The contention of the Complainant is that he contacted the 1^st Opposite Party to refund the difference in fare between the A/C bus and non A/C bus and collected the said amount as per the instructions of the 1^st Opposite Party she went to the Koyambedu and requested to refund the amount from the 2^nd Opposite Party and there was no response from the person in charge and he acted in a different way and when the Complainant tried to ask for some clarification. The 2^nd Opposite Party staff shouted and the Complainant was sent out of the premises and therefore failure to refund the difference in fare is deficiency on the part of the Opposite Party and further due to that she is suffered with mental agony.

          8. The 1^st Opposite Party contended that as per Ex.B2 terms and conditions of their web-site as per condition No.4 whenever bus operator changes the type of bus due to some reason, the Red Bus will refund the differential amount and accordingly the 1^st Opposite Party refunded the differential amount of Rs.400/- which was collected by the Complainant from the head office of the 2^nd Opposite Party and therefore this Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service and prays to dismiss the Complaint.

          9. The crucial question is whether the Complainant received differential amount from the 2nd Opposite Party. The Complainant categorically pleaded in the Complaint and stated in her evidence that, when she went to the 2^nd Opposite Party to collect the amount she was sent out of the premises by the 2^nd Opposite Party. The 1^st Opposite Party according to his case initiated refund of Rs.400/- he had requested the Complainant to collect the said amount from the 2^nd Opposite Party at Koyambedu office only. The 2^nd Opposite Party paid such amount or  not  is not known  to the knowledge of the 1^st Opposite Party and further no proof filed by the 1^st Opposite Party to accept that the 2^nd Opposite Party refunded the difference amount to the Complainant. Therefore in such circumstances, the case of the Complainant has to be accepted that the 2^nd Opposite Party has not paid the difference amount of ticket fare to the Complainant. The 1^st Opposite Party himself admitted as per condition No.4 in Ex.B2 that he is liable to refund the difference amount to the customer he ought  to have verified the  same to the 2^nd Opposite Party that difference amount has been paid or not. As such considering the rival submission as stated above, we hold that the difference amount of ticket fare have not  been paid to the Complainant and therefore, it is held that the 2^nd Opposite Party failed to pay the said amount to the Complainant, the 1^st Opposite Party is also liable for the same and hence it is further held that the Opposite Parties 1 & 2 have committed Deficiency in Service.

10. POINT NO:2

          The Complainant prayed to refund a sum of Rs.1,900/- towards the entire ticket charges paid by him. As per the conditions of the 1^st Opposite Party   he is   liable to refund only the difference amount of tickets charges. There is no evidence available on behalf of the Complainant what is difference amount for each ticket. However the 1^st Opposite Party stated that there is a difference amount of Rs.4oo/- for all the 4 tickets and in view of the same, it is held that the difference amount is only  Rs.400/- and for the said sum of Rs.400/- the Complainant is entitled for refund  from the Opposite Parties.  Due to inconvenience faced in travelling in the non  A/C bus,   the Complainant  suffered with mental agony is accepted and for the same it would be to order a sum of Rs.10,000/- compensation for mental agony, besides a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Parties 1 & 2 jointly or severally are ordered to refund a sum of Rs.400/- (Rupees four hundred  only) towards  the tickets charges to the Complainant  and also to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony, besides a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses.

The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of payment.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 12^th   day of January 2017.

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 28.05.2014                   Tickets

Ex.A2 dated 26.07.2014                   Legal Notice along with acknowledge card and

                                                    return cover

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE  1^st  OPPOSITE PARTY :

Ex.B1 dated NIL                     Copy of the Board Resolution

Ex.B2 dated NIL                     Copy of the terms and conditions of the 1^st

                                                    Opposite Party as is also available on the

                                                    Website  of the 1^st Opposite Party

                                                    (

MEMBER – II                                                               PRESIDENT