BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAPURTHALA.
Complaint No. 26 of 2020
Date of Instt. 05.03.2020
Date of Decision :16.12.2024
Jatinder Singh Parhar son of Shri Fateh Singh Resident of Near New Grain Market, Gate No. 3, Hoisharpur Road, Phagwara, Distt. Kapurthala - 144401.
....Complainant Versus
The Panipat-Jalandhar NH-1 Toll Way Pvt. Ltd. Toll Plaza : Ladowal (Km328 In Nh-1) (Through its Authorised Signatory/ Manager/ Director) Office at Toll Plaza Ladowal Ludhiana.
The National Highways Authority of India G-5 and G-6, Sector 10, New Delhi – 110075 (Through its Authorised Signatory/ Secretary/ Manager/ Director)
...Opposite parties
Complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act
Quorum: Before: Sh. Rajesh Bhatia (President)
Mrs. Rajita Sareen (Member)
S. Kanwar Jaswant Singh (Member)
Present: Sh. Nitin Mittoo, Advocate for the complainant.
OPs Exparte.
Order
Sh. Rajesh Bhatia (President)
1. The complainant has preferred this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act stating there in that complainant is the regular user of the national highway which is constructed and maintained by the above said Ops. Since, August, 2019, the father of the complainant was seriously ill and was admitted in DMC Hospital, Ludhiana and then in SPS Super Specialty, Hospital, Ludhiana. On regular basis the complainant along with his family travelled from Phagwara to Ludhiana for meeting his admitted father in Ludhiana, He used the National Highway to travel to his destination. The National Highway is constructed and maintained by OP No.2 through OP No. 1. The complainant used the services provided by the above mentioned Ops. Complainant in his course of travel from Phagwara to Ludhiana used the National Highway resulting which as per the provisions levied by the respondent no.2, the complainant has to give a toll charge called as the toll tax at the Ladowal toll plaza which is taken in care by the OP No.1. The OP No.1 charges the toll charge in lieu of which it provides the services such as well constructed patch less highways, streetlight facility, washrooms, quick charging of the tax from the number of booths installed at the toll plaza, emergency services, green belt etc. While using the highway regularly during all these days; in Phagwara, the complainant felt harassed as the road was not constructed properly as there were unexpected diversions due to incomplete flyover near the Bus Stand, Phagwara. The diversions were for about 1000-2000 meters or more, which causes inconvenience to the general people. The highway was mostly covered with patches and there were various spots in the highway where there were deep picket which caused the complainant to slow down his average speed of his vehicle and to the utter dismay of the complainant, the Satluj river bridge was covered with poor construction of road and to the further surprise the bridge didn't have any street light due to which caused difficulty at times to the complainant while locating the vehicles while crossing the Satluj river bridge at the time he was returning back to his native city of Phagwara at night. There was no green belt maintained or properly established by the respondents due to which the animals and other public crossed the highways which forced the complainant to reduce its speed and at times he had to apply immediate breaks for the same which caused unexpected jerks and in convenience to the complainant during his regular travel to Ludhiana while using the national highway. It caused the complainant a lot of time in reaching the toll plaza and on reaching the toll plaza, the complainant had to wait for long time standing in the queue due to improper and slow passing of the vehicular traffic from the toll booths constructed for the purpose of collection of toll tax. It is pertinent to mention here that the lanes made are improper, congested and the staff appointed is working in very slow and lenient manner which causes the traffic to congest which eventually leads to long queues. The complainant used the highway till the SPS Super Specialty, Hospital, Ludhiana but during the travel to the hospital, there were regular diversions due to poor maintenance of the highway that cross the city of Ludhiana. Here it is pertinent to mention here that from Phagwara to the DMC Hospital, Ludhiana the entire road is the part of the national highway, the travel on the national highway after paying the toll tax should not be less than an hour but it took the complainant around 2 hours to reach his destination which is a severe loss of time as far the situation of the complainant is concerned as his father was admitted in the hospital and was in serious condition. The traffic is caused due to the poor maintenance of the highway to which the respondents are bound to maintain against which the respondents are charging service amount in form of the toll tax. As per his daily routine, since August, 2019 the complainant along with his family members after meeting his father return to Phagwara but due to the heavy Jam at Ladowal flyover, the travel of the complainant was delayed. Further, it had become the daily routine for the complainant that after reaching the toll plaza and he was harassed to pass through long queues at the Ladowal Toll Plaza. At times, it took the complainant 15-20 minutes to cross the toll plaza at Ladowal, but for his peace of mind he ignored the poor services provided by the said respondents in respect to the maintenance of the national highway. On 25.09.2019, the complainant on way of his return to Phagwara at night, while on crossing the fly over near JCT mill, near GK Dhaba, the car of the complainant got imbalance due to the poor maintenance of the road, due to such poor maintenance one scooter also got imbalance and strike with the car of the complainant due to which the car came in a miserable condition. It took the complainant great difficulty to control the car on such a poor maintained road. Fortunately, no one was injured but the car of the complainant was in a very poor condition. Thereafter, the complainant got his car repaired next morning from a local repair in order to get it in a comfortable position to drive and then after 4 days i.e. on dated 30.09.2019 he took the car to workshop of the Stan Autos, Phagwara forthe other needful repair. It is pertinent to mention here that the respondents are duty bound to maintain the road at the national highways in exchange of which the toll tax is paid by the complainant and the other persons using the road. The complainant had to pay the damages that incurred to the car due to the poor maintenance of the road. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant had already got insured his vehicle, as a result he got the claim from the insurance company. But in getting the reimbursement of the damage suffered by the complainant, he had to run from pillar to post to get his money. On 06.10.2019, the complainant had to wait for about seven to eight minutes before he reached to the toll booth for the purpose of paying the toll tax whereas, as per the provisions stated in the information given by the respondent no.2 through its authorized signatory which admitted that there is total waiting time of 3 minutes, if three minutes exceeds in waiting, then there is provision to pass the vehicle free of cost. The copy of the information sought under the Right to Information Act, 2005 is attached as Exhibit C-Jbut to utter dismay of the complainant, the operator present gave a clarification to the complainant that there is no such rule and one has to pay the toll tax no matter what happens. After arguing for sometime, the operator of the respondent no.1, allowed the complainant to pass free of cost due to the delay occurred is more than three minutes. Thereafter, while his return from Ludhiana, the complainant was again harassed to pass through long queues at the toll plaza at Ladowal. During his return to Phagwara, the complainant joined the queue and it took the complainant 4 minutes and 10 seconds to reach the toll counter. The complainant recorded the whole incident in his mobile phone which noted the time it took to reach the counter of the toll tax. The complainant pleaded to let him go free of cost due to the three minute rule policy but again the same was denied and after a lot of arguments by the respondents through their operator, the operator issued a toll ticket vide ticket no. 430CA99653042 through booth & operator: 048 00481. Even more the operator used very foul, disgraceful language to the complainant and all his requests were thrown on deaf ears and ultimately the complaint had to make the payment of the toll tax which was illegal and against the provision laid down in law through various rules and regulations formulated from time to time in this regard. The respondents are in habit of extorting money from the
general public by showing the old notifications and fooling the citizens who are using the service provided by the respondents which is a pure act of fraud and un fair trade practice by the respondents towards the complainant and the millions of citizens who use this express way as a better way of facility provided by the respondents for travelling in time and safely. This amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of OPs and complainant has prayed that OPs be directed to refund the amount of toll charged for violating the three minute rule and the harassment and mental agony faced while driving in heavy traffic due to diversions and the jerks faced and the inconvenience and the harassment face while the car strike down of the car of the complainant which happened due to poor maintenance of roads on the national highway by the respondents resulting such mental agony caused to the complainant in between Phagwara and Ludhiana on the highway whose responsibility of maintenance startsfrom Jalandhar to Panipat specifically i.e. Rs. 130/- along with the damages of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant for the mental harassment suffered while his car the strike down at the midnight due to the poor maintenance of the road and further the Ops be directed to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- for the mental agony and undue harassment caused by the respondents in arguing and publicly criticizing the complainant by theoperator of the respondent to the complainant and the harassment caused to the complainant at all places on the highway i.e. where the car striked down, further where there were unexpected traffic diversions due to the non-construction of the roads and the flyovers which delayed the work programme of the complainant and further pay Rs. 10,000/- as litigation charges.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and OP No.1 was earlier represented by Mr. Vishal Sharma who was holding the authority letter dated 21/7/2020 on behalf of OP No.1. On 5/8/2020, the OP No.1 filed an application for dismissal of complaint. Sh. Sukhdev Singh Advocate had filed its memo dated 24/11/2021. After that both the opposite parties did not appear despite service and as such, both the opposite parties were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 9/5/2022.
3. To prove his case, complainant submitted affidavit alongwith documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C7.
4. We have heard the counsel for the complainant and also gone through the written arguments made by learned counsel for the complainant.
5. The Opposite party No.1 has taken the objection of jurisdiction of this Commission and has also separately filed an application for the same which was pending and this Commission passed order dated 31/3/2022 “that application for rejection of complaint filed by opposite party will be considered at the time of final arguments”. In the same application the opposite party No.1 has taken so many objections along with the objection that the complainant is not Consumer of opposite parties due to non mentioning of the Registered number of his vehicle and has not filed any evidence in this regard. The present complaint is filed by the complainant for the payment of toll tax to the opposite party no. 1, which is authorized to collect the same as per agreement between the opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2. We have also observed the same that the complainant has neither mentioned in his complaint the registered number of the car nor has given any evidence that he is the owner of car for which the complainant paid toll tax to the opposite party no.1. The opposite party even has taken this plea in their application for rejection of complaint that the complainant has not mentioned the registered vehicle number of his car and the same has also been observed by this Commission.
6. The complainant has not even filed any copy of RC as proof of ownership of car before this Commission and it is very necessary for the complainant to firstly establish that he is the consumer of the opposite parties as owner of vehicle i.e. car vide registered number of the vehicle but the complainant has not filed any evidence regarding the ownership of the vehicle. We have also examined document Ex.C-4 and Ex.C-5 as the complainant alleged it as bill of repair of his vehicle and some information of RTI. On these documents the name of the person in the documents do not match with the name of the complainant. So the plea of the complainant about Ex. C-4 & C-5 are also vague and all the other allegations of complaint are not proved by the complainant. The present complaint is not proved as per allegations by the complainant against the opposite parties. The complainant has also not proved that he is the consumer of the opposite parties. Therefore, the present complaint stands dismissed without any costs.
7. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated
16/12/2024
S. Kanwar Jaswant Singh Rajita Sareen Rajesh Bhatia
Member Member President
