BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.<br /> <br /> Complaint No:39 of 2008<br /> Date of Institution:15.04.2008<br /> Date of Service:22.05.2008<br /> Date of Decision:07.08.2008<br /> <br /> Dr.R.P.Mittal, Retired District Health Officer, 446-47, Block-C, Rajindra Estate, Moga.<br /> Complainant.<br /> <br /> Versus<br /> <br /> The Northern Railway through its Divisional Manager, Northern Railway, Ferozepur Cantt.<br /> <br /> Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> Complaint Under Section 12 of the<br /> Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> Quorum: Sh.J.S.Chawla,President.<br /> Smt.Bhupinder Kaur, Member.<br /> <br /> Present: None for the complainant.<br /> Sh.P.K.Sharma, Adv.counsel for the OP.<br /> <br /> (J.S.Chawla, President)<br /> Dr.R.P.Mittal, complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (herein-after referred to as ‘Act’) against the Northern Railway, Ferozepur Cantt through its Divisional Manager, (herein-after referred to as ‘Northern Railway’) directing them to pay back the amount which was illegally recovered by them from the complainant and also to pay Rs.50000/- as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment beside Rs.20000/- on account of deficiency in service.<br /> 2. Briefly stated, on 24.02.2006 and 04.03.2006 the complainant got four II A.C. seats reserved bearing PNR No.212-3534472, 820-0169761 and 842-1959284 for 18.04.06, 19.04.2006 and 25.04.2006 from Moga railway station on paying consideration of Rs.10301/-. That the railway department had decreased the II A.C fare upto the extent of 10.10% w.e.f. 01.04.2006. Because the journey was to be performed after 01.04.2006 and the tickets were purchased at old rates before 01.04.2006, the complainant requested the OP-Northern railway to refund the difference of fare, but the OP-Northern Railway refused to refund the excess fair on the ground that the tickets were purchased before 01.04.2006. Thereafter, the complainant also served notice to the OP-Northern Railway to admit his rightful claim, but to no effect. Hence, there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP-Northern Railway. That the aforesaid act and conduct of the OP-Northern Railway had caused great mental tension and harassment to him. Hence the present complaint.<br /> 3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP-Northern Railway who appeared through Sh.P.K.Sharma Advocate and filed their written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable; that the complaint is time barred and that the complainant is estopped by his act and conduct from filing the present complaint. On merits, the facts of reservation/purchase of aforesaid II A.C. tickets on 24.02.2006 and 04.03.2006 by the complainant were admitted. It was averred that because the tickets in question were purchased before 01.04.2006 (i.e. before the increase or decrease of fare), the complainant is not entitled to any refund. It was further averred that as per rules and regulations of the Railway department, in such a case, the passenger can apply for refund of amount after obtaining a Ticket Deposit Receipt (TDR) within 30 days from the date of purchase of ticket and apply on the prescribed format to Chief Commercial Manager, New Delhi, but the complainant neither obtained the Ticket Deposit Receipt (TDR) within prescribed period nor applied for the refund of same, hence the complainant is not entitled to refund of excess deposited fare, if any, deposited by him. All other allegations made in the complaint were specifically denied being incorrect. Hence, it was prayed that the complaint filed by the complainant is false and frivolous and it deserves dismissal.<br /> 4. In order to prove his case, the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.A1, copy of railway time table Ex.A2, copies of tickets Ex.A3 and Ex.A4 and closed his evidence.<br /> 5. To rebut the evidence of the complainant, the OP-Northern Railway tendered affidavit Ex.R1 of Sh.Brijesh Dharmani, Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, copies of letters Ex.R2 to Ex.R4, copy of rules Ex.R5 and closed their evidence.<br /> 6. We have heard the arguments of Sh.P.K.Sharma ld. counsel for the OP-Northern Railway and have very carefully perused the evidence on the file.<br /> 7. The main controversy in this case is whether the complainant is entitled to refund of excess fare already deposited by him on 24.02.2006 and 04.03.2006 of II AC which was decreased by 10.10.% w.e.f. 01.04.2006. The answer to this question is in negative. Firstly, the complainant has failed to produce any evidence on record to prove when the said decrease of 10.10% of fare was made effective. The increase or decrease of fare was applicable w.e.f. 01.04.2006 whereas the tickets in question were purchased on 24.02.2006 and 04.03.2006. So his case was not covered for refund, if any. Secondly, for the refund of excess fare, if any, paid by the complainant he was required to get Ticket Deposit Receipt (TDR) from the office of Chief Commercial Manager, New Delhi, who after processing, was entitled to refund the same to the complainant. Said Ticket Deposit Receipt (TDR) should have been obtained within 30 days from the date of purchase of ticket, but the complainant has failed to adduce any evidence to prove the aforesaid facts. In view of the aforesaid two reasons, the complainant is not entitled to any refund of excess fare as alleged. Hence, the complainant has failed to prove that he is entitled to refund of 10.10% of II AC fare for the tickets purchased by him on 24.02.2006 and 04.03.2006. <br /> 8. To prove the aforesaid contention, the ld.counsel for the OP-Northern Railway has produced affidavit Ex.R1 of Sh.Brijesh Dharmani, Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, copies of letters Ex.R2 to Ex.R4, copy of rules Ex.R5. On the other hand, no reliance could be placed on the affidavit of the complainant Ex.A1 and other documents Ex.A2 to Ex.A4 and we discard the same. <br /> 9. No other point is urged or argued before us.<br /> 10. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant has no merit and the same is dismissed. In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter, the file be consigned to the record room.<br /> <br /> (Bhupinder Kaur) (J.S.Chawla)<br /> Member President<br /> <br /> Announced in Open Forum.<br /> Dated: 07.08.2008.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />