Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/296/2015

Jagjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Union of India - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Arvind Kashyap Adv.

09 Feb 2016

ORDER

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

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	296 of 2015
Date  of  Institution	:	04.06.2015
Date   of   Decision	:	09.02.2016

 

 

 

 

 

Jagjit Singh, aged about 47years, son of Late Sh.Bal Bahadur Singh, resident of House No.961, Phase-VII, SAS Nagar, Mohali.

 

             …..Complainant

Versus

 

1]  Union of India, New Delhi, through its Secretary/General Manager, Northern Railway, Boroda House, New Delhi.

 

2]  Northern Railways Ambala, Tehsil and District Ambala through its Divisional Railway Manager.

 

3]  Northern Railways, Branch Chandigarh, through its Divisional Railway Manager.

 

….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU       MEMBER

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

 

 

For complainant(s)      :     Sh.Sudesh Sahi, Advocate

 

For Opposite Party(s)   :     Sh.S.K.Sahore, Advocate

 

 

PER JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case, the complainant along with his family consisting of himself, his wife, daughter, son and father-in-law Sh.Mohan Singh, visited Kanpur (UP) to meet his brother-in-law, by availing LTC facility and purchased the railway tickets of Shatabdi Train, for the said journey, as detailed in Para No.2 of the complaint. It is averred that in the Kalka Shatabdi Train No.12006 boarded from Chandigarh at 6.53 AM, the staff served breakfast etc. only to the complainant, his wife and father-in-law, but did not serve/provide any breakfast to his son and daughter saying that they do not have any food, as the same has finished.  The complainant reported the matter to TTE as well as mentioned this fact in the feedback chart provided to him. 

         It is submitted that on reaching New Delhi, the complainant came to know from Station Master there, that the train booked by them for Kanpur is late by 20 hours, as such the complainant had to cancel the booked tickets and purchased the tickets of Gomti Express for reaching Kanpur.  Further, on the returning day i.e. on 30.12.2014, when the complainant and his family members reached Railway Station Central, Kanpur, he noticed from the notice board that the Train No.12033, which was booked by them for reaching New Delhi, was running late by 18 to 20 hours.  As such, the complainant again had to get his tickets cancelled and purchased new ordinary tickets of Paryagraj Express Train No.12417, but the said train instead of reaching New Delhi at the scheduled time of 3/3.30 PM, ultimately reached New Delhi by much delay i.e. at about 9 P.M. and by that time, due to such delay, the complainant missed the Kalka-Shatabdi Train No.12005 for New Delhi to Chandigarh and more so, the Station Master, refused to refund any amount to the complainant saying that he arrived late.  Thereafter, the complainant had to travel by bus to Chandigarh.  Therefore, alleging the above acts & conducts of the OPs as gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the present compliant has been filed.

 

2]       The Opposite Parties have filed reply and took objection to the effect that in view of Section 13 & 15 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, the present compliant is not maintainable. The booking of tickets, travel made by the complainant along with his family and cancellation of ticket, done by the complainant, are admitted. 

         It is denied that the food was finished in the train and could not be served.  It is stated that on 25.12.2014 in Train No.12006 total passengers who travelled on the train was 807 against the total capacity of 892 passengers.  The total food was carried in the train was 900 units and after serving to all the passengers, 93 units of the food was left out and in this regard, the statement of Sh.Amar Pratap Singh, Catering Manager on Train No.12006/05 is enclosed as Ann.OP-1.  It is also stated that on 25.12.2014, no public complaint was received by the Ticketing Staff on the train nor any passenger reported about the non-serving of food to them and in this regard the statement of Sh.K.P.Singh, TS on the train and Sh.Surjit Singh, Dy.CIT, Kalka is enclosed as Ann.OP-2 and OP-3.  It is pleaded that due to winter season and foggy weather, the trains run very slow in the larger public safety of the passengers and thus were delayed due to heavy fog, which is beyond the control of the OPs and as such there is no negligence or deficiency in service on their part. Rest of the allegations have been denied with a prayer to dismiss the complaint.   

 

3]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

4]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

 

5]       The complainant and his wife, who are both employee of Punjab Government serving in different offices, preferred to avail LTC facility for their travel from Chandigarh to Kanpur via Delhi, along with family members, by booking their Railway Tickets, copies of which are annexed as Ann.C-2 to C-5.  The complainant started his journey on 25.12.2014 by Kalka-Delhi Shatabdi Train, but unfortunately, the meal served in the Train was insufficient and the two children were not served with vegetarian food due to the shortage of the same.  The complainant raised this matter by filling-up Passenger Feedback Form (Ann.C-6), mentioning that veg.food was not provided and demanded the refund of the charges towards such food.  The complainant also mentioned on the feedback form that such defect should not get repeated again.  The onward journey from Delhi to Kanpur was also not as per schedule for the reason that the train departing Delhi on 25.12.2014, as per Ann.C-2, was late by almost 20 hours.  Therefore, the complainant preferred to cancel his original ticket and reschedule his journey by taking another train, as he wanted to save time.  The complainant had to once again reschedule his journey by getting his ticket Ann.c-4 cancelled and take another train for his return journey to reach New Delhi from Kanpur.  Unfortunately, the said train, which was to reach New Delhi again got late by few hours, resulting into his missing the Delhi-Chandigarh Kalka Shatabdi Train scheduled for 30.12.2014. The complainant while reaching Delhi on 30.12.2014 at around 9.00 PM reported the matter with the Officials of New Delhi Railway Station, who instead of helping in refunding the fare, appended a note that the passengers were too late to qualify for refund.  Thus causing a loss of Rs.2220/- as per Ann.C-5.  The complainant had to shell-out another Rs.5000/- for his journey from Delhi to Chandigarh by a Deluxe Coach Bus, which according to him was on account of non-cooperative behavior of the officials of the Opposite Parties. The complainant has annexed Ann.C-13 proof of his payment towards the travel charges by special AC Coach Bus. The complainant while alleging deficiency in service against the OPs has sought the quoted relief. 

 

6]       The Opposite Parties though have contested the claim of the complainant and have also placed on record the statements of Station Manager, Catering Manager and also affidavits of Assistant Commercial Manager, Ambala Cantt., while contesting the claim of the complainant alleging no deficiency in service on their part.

 

7]       We have perused the documents placed on record by the parties and are of the opinion that there are only two main grouses of the complainant, the first pertaining to the non-serving of vegetarian food the children of the complainant and secondly, the non-refund of passenger ticket for his journey between Delhi-Chandigarh through Kalka Shatabi Express, which he unfortunately missed as the train he was travelling got delayed. The complainant has nowhere mentioned any harassment with regard to the cancellation and refund of the tickets, which he got cancelled between Delhi to Kanpur and back. 

 

8]       We have perused the Passenger Feedback Form, which is dated 25.12.2014 and also contains the name as well as mobile number of the complainant.  The main grouse of the complainant is with regard to the non-serving of vegetarian food to his children causing much discomfort.  The complainant had also requested for the refund of the charges towards this unserved food.  While going through the contents of the reply as well as statements of the Staff, which was on duty with the Train when the problem of non-serving of veg.food occurred, it is averred that a total of 807 passengers travelled through the Train which was taken by the complainant and his family and there were as many as 892 food trays were available with them, which were remained unserved and had gone waste.  Unfortunately, the Opposite Party failed to provide the break-up of Veg. & Non-Veg Food trays, to show that they were in possession of vegetarian food trays, which could have been served to the children of the complainant, if he had genuinely demanded so.  In the absence of any such cogent evidence, we are left to believe the averments of the complaint as well as the sworn affidavit of the complainant, to conclude that the Opposite Parties failed in its service towards the complainant. We also understand that the statements which are found appended with the reply of the Opposite Parties are dated much after the filing of the complaint and the OPs had ample time at their hand to go into every details of the facts & circumstances of the complaint of the complainant.  The reply of the Opposite Parties being hollow and bereft of any trustworthy evidence on this score deserves no merit. The OPs are found deficient in rendering proper service to the complainant on this score.

 

9]       However, on the second point of issue with regard to the refund of ticket amounting to Rs.2220/-, which the complainant missed to go from Delhi to Chandigarh due to the late arrival of the train from Kanpur.  The complainant has not placed on record the proof of rejection of the refund of the ticket by the New Delhi Railway Station Authorities and the Opposite Parties in reply to his allegation too have not denied the right of the complainant to lay such claim before the competent authority of Railway Claims Tribunal having competent jurisdiction for the same.  In the absence of any proof of denial of refund and also the availability of remedy with the complainant to claim the same before the competent established tribunal, we feel no case of deficiency in service is made out against the Opposite Parties on this score. 

 

10]      In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the Opposite Parties are found deficient in rendering proper service to the complainant. Hence, the present complaint of the Complainant is partly allowed against the Opposite Parties.  The Opposite Parties are jointly & severally directed as under:-

 

 [a] To refund the amount charged towards two vegetarian food trays to the complainant;

 

[b] To pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as consolidated amount of compensation for causing mental agony and harassment on account of deficiency in service;

 

[c] To pay litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.5,000/-

 

         The above said order shall be complied within 45 days of its receipt by the Opposite Parties; thereafter, they shall be liable to pay an interest @18% per annum on the amount mentioned in sub-para [a] & [b] above, from the date of filing this complaint till it is paid, apart from paying litigation expenses.

 

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

 

Announced

9^th February, 2016                                                                

                                                                        Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

(JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

Om                                                                                                                       

 

 

DISTRICT FORUM – II

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.296 OF 2015

PRESENT:   None   Dated the 9th day of February, 2016

O R D E R                        Vide our detailed order of even date, recorded separately, the complaint has been partly allowed against the Opposite Parties.                     After compliance, file be consigned to record room.

 

(Priti Malhotra)	(Rajan Dewan)	(Jaswinder Singh Sidhu)
Member	President	Member