For Complainant         :           Sri S. K. Bhatra, Advocate & associates.

For Opp. Party             :           Sri K. N. Samantaray, Advocate & associates.

1.                     The brief history of the case of the complainant is that he went to OSRTC ticket counter at Koraput to purchase two tickets to Visakhapatnam (VSP) as he had to see off her daughter who was going to Chennai by train from VSP.  It is submitted that as the ticket to VSP was not available at Koraput OSRTC ticket counter, he purchased two tickets on 20.10.2016 from OSRTC, Jeypore ticket counter for Rs.486/- to perform journey on 21.10.2016.  It is further submitted that the date of journey was 21.10.2016 with 10.30 pm schedule time of the bus at Koraput bus stand.  The complainant submitted that he and his daughter waited at Koraput bus stand from 9.45 pm to 12.00 midnight on 21.10.2016 but the bus did not come to the bus stand and on enquiry the complainant could know that the bus without entering into the bus stand went through bye-pass.  On enquiry with the officials of OSRTC, Koraput, none listened him.  It is further submitted that the complainant hired a taxi from Koraput and went to VSP incurring a sum of Rs.6000/-.  Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, he filed this case praying the Forum to direct the OP to pay Rs.56, 000/- towards compensation on different counter to the complainant.

2.                     The OP filed counter denying the allegations of the complainant but contended that the complainant has not mentioned Bus Number in his complaint petition.  It is contended that the complainant has to prove that he enquired into the matter at Koraput counter regarding bus and went to VSP by hiring a taxi.  Denying all other allegations of the complainant and also denying any deficiency in service on its part, the OP prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                     Both the parties have filed certain documents along with affidavits in support of their respective cases.  Heard from the OP through its A/R and perused the materials available on record.

4.                     In this case, purchase of two tickets by the complainant from OSRTC, Jeypore ticket counter for the journey on 21.10.2016 to VSP is supported by copy of ticket filed by the complainant in this case. The complainant stated that he went to ticket counter at Koraput but as the tickets were not available, he purchased the tickets from Jeypore counter of OSRTC and waited at Koraput bus stand on 21.10.2016 on 21.10.2016 from 9.45 to 12.00 midnight but the bus did not come to bus stand at Koraput though its time was 10.30 pm at Koraput bus stand.  Thereafter, he proceeded to VSP by hiring a taxi.  It is unfortunate that the complainant has not furnished the money receipt from taxi owner in support of his case.  The contention of the OP that the complainant has not mentioned the Bus No. in his complaint is also rejected as the Bus No. is not available in the ticket itself.

5.                     The OP in his counter nowhere stated that the Jeypore-Rajmundry OSRTC bus had entered into Koraput bus stand on 21.10.2016.  Without any such mention in the counter, the OP has filed three affidavits, one from Conductor of the bus and two from drivers of the bus on the alleged date stating that the bus had entered into Koraput bus stand at 11.00 pm and departed at 11.05 pm on 21.10.2016.  These affidavits are after thought of the OP and hence could not be considered by us.

6.                     It is further seen that Seat No.25 & 26 has been purchased by the complainant but the passengers were not present in their above seats at Jeypore bus stand.  In the above circumstances, it was the duty of the Conductor to report about the absence of two passengers to the officer stationed at ticket counter but he has not done so.  Further the Conductor must observe the situation up to next stop at Koraput awaiting the passengers but the conductor also failed to do so.  If the passengers are absent there, the fact was to be brought to the knowledge of ATM, Koraput, which is also not done by the conductor.  These facts are not available in the counter filed by the OP.  The above inactions certainly amount to deficiency in service on the part of the OP and hence the OP is to refund Rs.486/- towards cost of two tickets with interest to the complainant.  Further due to inconvenient caused by the OP, the complainant must have suffered some mental agony and has come up with this case incurring some expenditure.  Considering the sufferings, we feel a sum of Rs.3000/- towards compensation and cost in favour of the complainant will meet the ends of justice.

7.                     Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the OP is directed to refund Rs.486/- towards cost of the tickets with interest @ 12% p.a. from 21.10.2016 and to pay Rs.3000/- towards compensation and cost to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.

(to dict.)