Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/395/2015

Brij Bhushan Rana - Complainant(s)

Versus

Union of India - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Ravinder Pal Singh Adv.

10 Feb 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	395 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	28.7.2015
Date   of   Decision	:	10.2.2016

 

 

 

 

 

Brij Bhushan Rana S/o Sh. G.D. Rana R/o H. No. 5254/3, Modern Housing Complex, Manimajra, Chandigarh 160101

                …..Complainant

Versus

 

 

1. Union of India through the Secretary to Government of India Ministry of Railway Rail Bhawan New Delhi.

 

2. Station Master New Delhi Railway Station, New Delhi

 

3. Station Master Chandigarh Railway Station Chandigarh.

 

4. Kartar Singh CIT, Kalka division Kalka Railway station, Kalka, District Panchkula.

 

 

….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU       MEMBER

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

 

 

For complainant(s)      :     Sh. R.P. Singh, Advocate

 

For Opposite Party(s)   :     Sh. Sunil K. Shore, Advocate.

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case, the complainant booked 5 tickets on 5.8.2014 for traveling from Chandigarh to Mujjaffarpur via New Delhi for 4.10.2014/5.10.2014.  The journey of the complainant alongwith his family remained satisfactory while traveling from Chandigarh to Mujjaffarpur via New Delhi but while returning from Mujjaffarpur to Chandigarh via Delhi complainant faced a very bad experience with OPs especially Opposite Party No.4.  According to the complainant he alongwith his family members boarded in Vaishali Express on 4.10.2014 from  Mujjaffarpur Railway Station to New Delhi Railway Station which was to arrive at New Delhi on the next date i.e. on 5.10.2014 at 0630 hrs. and thereafter the complainant  and his family were to board the next train i.e. Shatabadi express from New Delhi Station which was scheduled at 0740 hrs on 5.10.2014 but unfortunately the earlier train arrived at New Delhi station at 0830 hr i.e. late by two hours and by then the train in which the complainant and his family were to board for Chandigarh departed.  The complainant enquired from the enquiry counter about the next train i.e. Pashim express. He informed the official at enquiry counter that he is having tickets of Shatabadi Express of Chair Car Category which is superior amongst the other classes except first class so whether he can travel in the Paschim Express in two or three tier AC class on the same tickets upon which the official told the complainant that he can travel on the same tickets being higher in class. Accordingly when the complainant alongwith his family  went to board in AC 3 tier coach at platform No.5 he met there with Sh. Kartar Singh, CIT, Kalka Railway Station (OP No.4) who despite explaining all the things did not allow them to board in that AC Coach and sent them in a sleeper coach and asked them to purchase tickets again of the said Paschim Express alongwith fine. Left with no alternative the complainant purchased the tickets  again alongwith fine, which caused a lot mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant and his family.  The complainant lodged a complaint on the online portal of the Indian railway and explained everything and requested for refund of Rs.1800/- which had been paid to Opposite Party No.4 as fine and also take action against Opposite Party No.4 but nothing has been done till date.  Alleging the aforesaid act of the Opposite Parties deficiency in rendering service the instant complaint has been filed.

 

2.     Opposite Parties in their reply while admitting the factual matrix of the case stated that this Forum has got no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try this complaint as no cause of action arose to the complainant at Chandigarh. The complainant booked the ticket from post office at Hoshiarpur and he missed his train from New Delhi to Chandigarh. It has been averred that the reserve ticket remains valid only for specific train and class. As per railway rules if any passenger misses his train because of late running of the earlier train he can get the revalidation of the same ticket to travel on the next available train. But the complainant has not got the revalidation of the ticket done to enable him to travel on the next available train on the same ticket. If any passenger travel on the train without re-validation of the ticket then fine is imposed on the same as has been done in the present case. It has been averred that a confront inquiry was also held on the complaint of the complainant and the complainant admitted that he has no complaint from Opposite Party No.4. It is averred that the complaint is not maintainable in view of Section 13 and 15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1986 as interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and held by the Hon’ble National Commission in many judgments. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

 

3.     The Complainant also filed rejoinder thereby reiterating the averments as made in complaint and controverting that of the Opposite Parties made in the reply.
4.     Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
5.     We have heard the ld. Counsel for parties and have also perused the record.
6.     The OPs objected qua jurisdiction of this Forum stating that the jurisdiction of this Forum is barred in view of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and referred to section 13 and 15 of the said Act reproduced as under:-

“13  jurisdiction powers and authority of claims Tribunal

(1) The claims Tribunal shall exercise on and from the appointed day, all such jurisdiction, powers and  authority as were exercised immediately before that day by civil court or a Claims Commissioner appointed under the provisions of Railway Act-

    (a) relating to the responsibility of      the railway  administrations as        carriers under Chapter VII of the          Railways Act in respect of claims      for-

             (i) Compensation for loss,                 destruction, damages,                  deterioration or non-                   delivery of animals or                  good entrusted to a                    railway administration                 for carriage by railway;

             (ii) Compensation payable                  under Section 82A of the               Railway Act or the rules                 made thereunder; and 

    (b)      in respect of the claims               for refund of fares or                 part thereof or for refund           of any freight paid in

             respect of animals or goods            entrusted    to a railway                  administration to be carried           by railway.

15. Bar of jurisdiction:- On and from the appointed day no court or other authority shall have or be entitled to exercise any jurisdiction powers or authority in relation to the matters referred to in (sub-sections (1) and 1-A) of Section 13.”.

In this regard they have also put reliance on judgments titled as Northern Railway vs. Dau Dayal, 2010 CPJ 514 NC,  Union of India Vs.Sri Ramji Enterprises & Anr., UOI and others Vs. Yash Industries & another and Kacharu Lal Aggarwal Vs. General Manager, UOI.

7.         The objection of the OPs that the jurisdiction of this Forum is barred in view of Railway Tribunal Act is not tenable as the matter in the case is not covered under Section 13 and 15 of the Railway Tribunal Act the specific provisions referred by the OPs which the OPs claimed to have barring effect.  The present case is not related with refund of any tickets which the complainant originally booked but pertains to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice resorted at the end of the OPs, which caused the complainant to pay double the amount of the actual ticket. It is settled principle of law that the remedy under Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is an alternative and additional remedy and thus the complainant has full right to approach Consumer Forum for the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice resorted to by the OPs.  
8.     The objection qua territorial jurisdiction is also not tenable in the light of the factum that the complainant travelled from New Delhi to Chandigarh and is fully competent to file complaint at New Delhi or at Chandigarh. Moreover the so called confront inquiry was also held at Chandigarh relating to the matter in dispute.
9.     It is not denying the fact that the complainant purchased 5 tickets (four adult and one child) on 5.8.2014 for traveling from Chandigarh to Mujjaffarpur via New Delhi on 28.9.2014 and  return from Mujjaffarpur to Chandigarh via New Delhi for 4.10.2014/5.10.2014. According to the complainant while traveling from Chandigarh to Mujjaffarpur the journey was smooth but they had to face bad experience while coming from Mujjaffarpur to Chandigarh. On 4.10.2014  while back to his destination the complainant and his family members boarded the train from Mujjaffarpur to New Delhi and its connected train from New Delhi was to depart at 7.40 hours on 5.10.2014 but unfortunately earlier train i.e.  Vaishali Express in which they were traveling arrived late  by two hours at New Delhi owing  to this reason the connected  train i.e. Shatabdi express was missed by the complainant. From the enquiry counter at new delhi station the complainant came to know that the next train Paschim express is scheduled to leave at 1040 hours on the same day and he was told by the enquiry counter that they can travel on the same with the same ticket and they accordingly boarded in the said train. It is the main allegation of the complainant that he was harassed by Opposite Party No.4 during the journey from New Delhi to Chandigarh.  Opposite Party No.4 alleged to have demanded bribe of Rs.1000/- through a 4^th class employee and refusal of the same costed him
   Rs.2000/- which includes the amount of ticket alongwith penalty. The complainant alleged that  the complaint in this regard was also made to the officials of the OP and the inquiry conducted thereon was not finalized due to absence of the employee through whom Opposite Party No.4 approached the complainant to pay bribe of Rs.1000/-. The complainant also  objected to the genuineness of the inquiry held by the OPs( 1 to 3). 
10.      It is submitted on behalf of the OPs that the complainant was rightly charged for the tickets as he was considered as traveling without ticket as he failed to get the tickets  revalidated before boarding the next train available i.e. Paschim Express when he missed his previously booked train. The Opposite Parties also denied the allegation of demand of bribe by Opposite Party No.4 and placed on record the inquiry conducted against the said official i.e. Opposite Party No.4 and claimed that in  that very inquiry   proceedings the complainant himself submitted that he has no grouse against Opposite Party No.4 and rather had grouse against the 4^th class employee who misbehaved him.  Denying any deficiency in service OPs prayed dismissal of the complaint. 
11.     In our opinion the complainant suffered due to deficiency on the part of the officials of OPs who failed to guide the complainant properly at the time when he missed his connected train at New Delhi due to the late arrival of the Vaishali Express vide which he was traveling.  Had he been asked to get his tickets revalidated at New Delhi Station only before boarding in Pashchim Express  he would not have to pay amount of the tickets with penalty for traveling without ticket. The official of the OPs at enquiry counter New Delhi failed to perform their duty diligently. The record further reveals that Opposite Party No.4 generated only four tickets  and issued receipts for  Rs.1800/- whereas it is not denying fact that the complainant was traveling alongwith three more adults and one child of 7 years old meaning thereby no ticket was issued by Opposite Party No.4 for the child which shows malafide   of Opposite Party No.4; which also establish the allegation of the complainant that he was not refunded Rs.200/- out of Rs.2000/- paid by him to the Opposite Party 4 for the tickets.  The non issuance of 5^th ticket certainly creates doubt as in the inquiry report Opposite Party No.4 admitted that he received Rs.2000/- from the complainant against the receipt of Rs.1800/- and there is no reference that he had returned the balance of Rs.200/- to the complainant. In our opinion benefit of this doubt shall be given to the complainant.
12.     In the set of above circumstances, we are of the opinion that certainly the complainant has suffered harassment at the hands of OPs due to their deficient service for which he had to pay again for the tickets with  penalty despite having valid booked tickets of higher category train, which he (alongwith other family members) unfortunately  missed due to late  arrival of earlier train.
13.      Although the complainant is not entitled for refund of the tickets but he is fully entitled for the compensation on account of harassment suffered by him at the hands of the OPs due to their negligent and deficient act as explained above.   
14.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the complaint deserves to be allowed.  Accordingly, the complaint is partly allowed and the Opposite Parties are jointly & severally directed as under:-

        

a]  To pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant.

C]  To pay Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

 

         The above said order shall be complied with by the Opposite Parties within 45 days of its receipt, failing which they shall be liable to pay interest on the compensation amount of Rs.10,000/-at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of this order till it is paid, besides paying litigation expenses.

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

10/2/2016

                                                                                       Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

 (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER