This is a complaint under sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act., 1986 filed by Dilip Kr. Dutta where in it is contended interalia to the effect that the complainant purchased Railway Tickets for seven members of his family for the journey on 30/01/’13 by 12344 Dn. Darjeeling Mail under PNR nos. being 611-3898539 & 660-9798148 by 3A from Jalpaiguri Station to Bardhaman Jn. and there boarding was fixed from Jalpaiguri Town Station. But on very date of journey the complainant could know that the 3A coach would not be available from the boarding station at Jalpaiguri Town Station. It is further contended that out of said seven members two members were mainors & two members were sr. citizen. As the time at his hand on that day was very short to reach the New Jalpaiguri Railway Station to get into the 3A coach meant for them, considering this precarious condition he had to travel to New Jalpaiguri Railway Station alongwith his said family members by hiring a car by spending Rs. 1,500/- . Inspite of having the contact no. of the complainant available in the booking slip as the op didn’t communicate the situation to the complainant in relation to cancellation of said 3A coach, the station authorities made them liable for deficiency in service. Hence, this case. The Op. contested this case by filing Written Version and denied all materials allegations as alleged by the complainant against the Op. It is further contended that though the concerned coach of 3A was not connected(for 12344Dn.) with 55752Dn. from Holdibari Railway Station to New Jalpaiguri Railway Station on the relevant day, but as the said 55752Dn. ran as usual on 30/01/’13 the complainant could have availed the train no.55752 Dn. easily from Jalpaiguri Railway Station to avail the concerned 3A coach from New Jalpaiguri Railway Station. In the circumstances there was no deficiency of service on the part of the Railway Authority and as such the complainant is not entitled to get reliefs as sought for. In the circumstances the op. prayed for dismissal of the case with cost. Under the above averments both parties went on hearing with the following points:-

1) Was the complainant able to entrain the concerned 55752Dn. at Jalpaiguri Town Station to avail the concerned 3A coach at NJP Railway Station? 2) Was the complainant informed by the op well in advance to entrain the 55752Dn from Holdibari Railway Station to NJP Railway Station for availing 3A coach in question? 3) Is the complainant entitle to get reliefs as shough for? 4) To what other relief or reliefs is the complainant entitled to get? Decisions with reasons Point nos. 1,2 & 3:- All these points are takenup together for consideration in discursions for convenience as the same are inter linked and inter related. Admittedly, the complainant purchased Railway Tickets for his seven family members to avail 3A coach from Jalpaiguri Town Station in 55752Dn. for journey by 12344Dn. Darjeeling Mail on 30/01/’13 from NJP Railway Station. Admittedly the said 3A coach was not provided by the opposite party on 30/01/’13 with 55752 Dn. from Holdibari Railway Station to NJP Railway Station and it is admitted by certificate dt. 22/02/’13 issued on behalf of Op. (vide Annex-1). After having gone through the entire record with meticulous care we got sufficient materials to say that the op couldn’t satisfy us as to why inspite of having contact no. of complainant on the booking slip the op didn’t inform the complainant on 30/01/’13 well in advance in relation to non providing of 3A coach with 55752Dn. That apart there is no evidence adduced on behalf of the Op to the effect that at the relevant time the Op had announced loudly by loud speaker to inform all the passengers of said 3A coach to the effect that the passengers of 3A coach (which was not provided with 55752Dn.)would be entitled to entrain any coach of 55752 Dn. , without purchasing any further ticket, to avail the said 3A coach at NJP Railway Station with 12344Dn. In the circumstance we are compelled to opine that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Op. Moreover on close scrutiny of the materials on record we do opine that the complainant’s case in relation to availing hired care by spending Rs. 1,500/- to avail 3A coach attached to 12344Dn. at NJP Railway Station on relevant day should not be ignored and disbelieved. Accordingly the complainant is entitled to get reliefs as shough for . Thus the case succeeds. Hence, it is

ORDERED

That the C.C.No.-09/2013 under Sec. Consumer Protection .Act. 1986 filed by complainant Dilip Kr. Dutta be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.Ps. with cost of Rs. 1,000/- to be paid by the O.Ps. in favour of complainnat. The O.Ps are further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,500/- infavour of the complainant for his hiring of vehicle. The O.Ps are further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 7,000/- to the complainant as compensation for harassment & mental injury. The O.Ps are further directed to liquidate the said entire decretal amount in favour of the complainant within one month from this date, failing which the complainant will be entitled to recover the said entire amount along with interest @10% p.a. to be calculated on and from the date of filing of this case till the date of recovery of entire amount by filing a separate proceeding against the O.Ps. according to law.