Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/81/2015

T.Shankar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Public Relation Officer, - Opp.Party(s)

in person

28 Aug 2017

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  05.05.2015

                                                                Order pronounced on: 28.08.2017

 

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

                    THIRU.M.UYIRROLI KANNAN, B.B.A., B.L., MEMBER - I

 

MONDAY THE 28^th  DAY OF AUGUST 2017

 

C.C.NO.81/2015

 

Mr.T.Shankar,

S/o Mr.K.Thiruvirkolam,

No.31/23, Kanimman Koil Street,

Shenoy Nagar,

Chennai – 600 030.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

1. The Public Relation Officer,

Northern Railway,

NDCA Building,

State Entry Road,

New Delhi- 110 055.

 

2. The General Manager,

Indian Railways, (Southern),

Chennai – 600 003.

 

.....Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                 : 22.05.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : Mr.T.Shankar

Counsel for   Opposite Parties                 : M/s.N.Narayanan

 

 

O R D E R

 

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

          This complaint is filed by the complainant to refund the sum of Rs.6,300/- for the waitlisted passengers and also pay compensation for mental agony with cost of the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant booked E-tickets on 03.12.2013 to travel from Chennai to New Delhi on 04.12.2013 under Tatkal quota. All the 4 tickkets were wait listed at the time of booking. After preparation of chart, only one ticket was confirmed and three other tickets were still waitlisted. The complainant again booked another E-ticket for the rest of three passengers under Tatkal quota for their journey on 06.12.2013 and got confirmed tickets.

          2. The complainant sent detailed representation to the opposite party for refund of ticket amount in respect of the three listed passengers. The internet status showed ‘Refund under Process’. The complainant issued legal notice on 28.01.2015 to the opposite parties and the same was received by them. The 1^st opposite party rejected the claim of the complainant that he had not received the certificate from the TTE for the cancellation of the waitlisted passengers. However, the TTE did not give any acknowledgement for the waitlisted passengers. The rejection of the refund of money made by the opposite party is not justifiable. Hence the complainant filed the complaint to refund the sum of Rs.6,300/- for the waitlisted passengers and also to pay compensation for mental agony with cost of the complaint.

3. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  OPPOSITE PARTIES IN BRIEF :

          The opposite parties admits that the complainant booked the ticket vide transaction ID 0805004234 and PNR No.4604361942 and booking of another ticket under tatkal quota for the waitlisted passengers are not admitted as the complainant has not given the details for PNR No. of another ticket and Train No. and class of journey of said tatkal quota ticket. As per Coaching Tariff Rules relating to partially confirmed E-ticket passengers who is availing the journey on such ticket as to obtain TTE certificate regarding non availing of journey by the  waitlisted passengers and thereafter he/she can file TDR for refund of fare submitting above certificate in support of claim. But in the instant case the complainant has failed to collect TTE certificate and hence the claim was repudiated on 02.03.2015 and advised the IRCTC accordingly for onward information to the complainant.  

4. The coach TTE refused to issue the certificate of refund and so far as status of refund shown on internet as “REFUND UNDER PROCESS” is concerned, it is submitted that said information was posted by IRCTC and our office has nothing to do with said matter and the same was pertains to IRCTC.  The alleged deficiency attributed by the complainant is in relation to refund of fares and hence this matter to be tried by a separate Tribunal named as Railway Claims Tribunal and not by any other court. This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as per section 13 and section 15 of the Railways Act. Therefore the opposite parties have not committed any deficiency in service and pray to dismiss the complaint with costs.

 

 

5. 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?

6. POINT NO :1

          The admitted facts are that the complainant booked Ex.A1 E-ticket for four passengers under Tatkal quota and all the passengers are waitlisted at the time of booking and after preparation of chart as per Ex.A2 only one passenger was confirmed and the other three passengers was still waitlisted  and hence the complainant again booked three tickets under Tatkal quota on 05.12.2013 for the  journey of three waitlisted passengers and the same was confirmed under EX.A3 E-ticket and thereafter the complainant wrote Ex.A7 letter to refund amount for the three waitlisted  passengers  and also issued Ex.A8 notice and since the amount was not refunded for the three passengers the present complaint has been filed.

          7. Ex.A2 is the proof for confirming ticket for one passenger for journey on 04.12.2013 and waitlisted for the other three passengers for Ex.A1 E-ticket. The Ex.A1 ticket booked to travel in the Tamil Nadu express. However, the E-ticket for the three waitlisted passengers booked under Tatkal quota viz to travel in Rajathani Express on 06.12.2013. Therefore the complainant got confirmed ticket under Tatkal quota in Ex.A3 to travel on 06.12.2013 has nothing to do with the case of the complainant.

          8. However, the complainant alleged deficiency against the opposite parties that for the three waitlisted passengers the amount was not refunded to him. The complainant sent Ex.A7 letter to the first opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.6,300/- for three tickets. That was accepted by the opposite parties and also made refund process and the said process shown in Ex.A5 dated 26.12.2013.   Further the Complainant also sent Ex.A8 notice to the Opposite Parties and Ex.A9 reply dated 11.02.2015 in respect of nonpayment of refund for three waitlisted passengers.  

          9. The opposite parties taken a stand in their written version that as per the coaching tarific rules relating to partially confirmed E-ticket passengers who is availing the journey on such ticket has to obtain TTE certificate regarding non availment of journey by waitlisted passengers and since the complainant has to failed to collect the TTE certificate and not filed such a certificate with refund claim the claim was repudiated.

10. The categoric case of the complainant that for only one passenger the ticket was confirmed and he had travelled on 04.12.2013 and other three passengers subsequently booked tickets and travelled on 06.12.2013 as per Ex.A3. This fact was not denied by the opposite parties. The complainant pleaded in the complaint that the TTE did give any receipt on 05.12.2013 for the rest of the waitlisted passengers. This complainant has not travelled on that date by utilizing the Ex.A1 E-ticket. Only Mr.Amit Sohal  traveled from Chennai to Delhi as per Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 documents. Such passenger Amit Sohal has not filed any affidavit in support of the contention of the complainant that he had demanded certificate from the coach TTE for the waitlisted passengers. He is only the competent to speak about such fact and not the complainant. Further in Ex.A1 ticket under the heading important, it has been specifically printed that to

          “Obtain certificate from the TTE/conductor in case of PARTIALLY waitlisted E-ticket, LESS No. OF PASSENGERS travelled, A.C.FAILURE, TRAVEL IN LOWER CLASS. This original certificate must be sent to GGM (IT) IRCTC Ltd.,”

Therefore at the time of claiming refund of ticket amount the certificate obtained from the TTE shall be enclosed with the claim. However, the complainant has not proved that Mr. Amit Sohal had demanded such certificate from the TTE to make claim for the waitlisted passengers and further there is no TTE endorsement is available in the Ex.A1 ticket which is utilized by the Amit Sohal for his journey. Therefore, in view of the forgoing discussions, we hold that the rejection made by the opposite parties is acceptable and therefore the complainant has not proved the deficiency committed by the opposite parties and accordingly this point is answered.

11. POINT NO: 2

Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 28^th day of August 2017.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 03.12.2013                   E-ticket booking

Ex.A2 dated 04.12.2013                   Chart prepared ticket

Ex.A3 dated 05.12.2013                   E-ticket booking

Ex.A4 dated 06.12.2013                   Communication sent by Opposite Parties  to

                                                  Complainant

 

Ex.A5 dated 26.12.2013                   IRCTC refund status (series)

Ex.A6 dated NIL                     Complaint to opposite parties by e-maill with reply

Ex.A7 dated 25.01.2014                   Letter by complainant to opposite parties

Ex.A8 dated 28.01.2015                   Legal Notice to opposite parties

Ex.A9 dated 11.02.2015                   Reply by opposite parties

Ex.A10 dated 11.02.2015                 Reply by opposite parties

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTIES :

 

                                       …… NIL ……

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT