BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.141 of 2015

Date of Instt. 06.04.2015

Date of Decision: 20.09.2017

Raman Dutt S/o Madan Lal Dutt R/o 8, Green Model Town, Jalandhar previously residing at Central Mills, Old Railway Road, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Railways, New Delhi.

2. Northern Railways, Ferozepur Railway Station, Ferozepur through its General Manager.

3. Station Master, Jalandhar Railway Station, Jalandhar.

….… Opposite parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Sh. Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh. MS Sachdev, Adv. Counsel for the complainant.

Sh. GS Kahlon, Adv Counsel for OP No.1 to 3.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. The instant complaint filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that he regularly goes to Delhi and generally preferred the Executive Class of Shatabadi train. Shatabadi train is premium train of Indian Railways and comparatively excess fare is charged by Indian Railways on the ground that they are providing luxurious travel on the said train. In fact, there are two executive coaches in the said train for which nearly double charge is taken for travel from the passenger. It is being widely published that executive coaches are the most luxurious coaches and due to that reason the premium fares are being charged.

2. That initially the complainant had traveled to Delhi on Shatabdi train, on 07.09.2012 and when he was coming back from Delhi, in Coach No.E-2 and he had suffered great jerks and at that time a complaint was given in the complaint register being maintained by Ticket Travel Examiner (TTE). It was clearly mentioned that due to the said strong jerks, big push is being given to the body and because of said jerks, the body had started paining. It was clearly mentioned that jerks are very uncomfortable and it appears that there are same defect in the coach. Request was also made to rectify the said problem as it can lead to serious injury to the back bone, cervical or disc. The TTE had informed that this complaint would be given to the concerned authorities. At that time the PNR number of the complainant was 27078646432 dated 07.09.2012. The complainant did not file the Consumer complaint at that stage, with the hope that the problem would be rectified.

3. That on 17.02.2015, the complainant had again traveled to Delhi and while coming back from Delhi, he was traveling in E1 Coach, Seat No.31. On the said day he also felt heavy jerks in the coach, even the water had spilled on his clothes and he suffered pain in the neck and lower back due to the said jerks. The complainant felt very uneasy and even while writing the complaint had felt a lot of jerks. Many other passengers were also complaining for the same problem and even one lady, who was sitting on seat No.25 also gave a same complaint. After going through the complaint register, it transpired that many other passengers have also written the similar complaints. Even the co-passenger Tarwinder Singh, who was sitting on Seat No.30 suffered bad jerks and moved complaint to that effect. After reaching Jalandhar, the complainant had to immediately go to Chodha Hospital, Jalandhar to get himself medically examined and on examination Cervical Spondylosis and pain on the lower back was found. The complainant was medically examined and thereafter remained on medication and bed rest for about 15 days. The problem is persistent and it clearly shows that the coach, which is being used is faulty and due to that reason, great uncomfortable travel is being suffered not only by the complainant rather other passenger also and as such there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OP and as such the instant complaint filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to refund the amount of ticket fare, received by the OPs from the complainant from New Delhi to Jalandhar and further OPs be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.25,000/- and also be directed to immediately rectify the fault in the coaches.

4. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable against the OPs as there was neither any deficiency in service nor any negligence on the part of the OPs and further alleged that the complaint of the complainant is false, frivolous, vexatious to the very knowledge of the complainant and further alleged that the complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands rather he has suppressed the material facts even the complainant is estopped from filing such like false and baseless complaints and damaging the reputation and image of Indian Railways. On merits, the allegations made by the complainant is categorically denied by the OP and further submitted that it is clear that there is no proof of complainant having cervical spondylosis as a result of travel in the above said train and as such the complaint of the complainant is without merit and the same may be dismissed.

5. In order to prove the case of the complainant, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence two affidavits Ex.CA and Ex.CB alongwith some documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C17 and then evidence of the complainant was closed by order, vide order dated 30.11.2015.

6. In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, counsel for the OPs tendred into evidence two affidavits i.e. Ex.OP-A and Ex.OP-B alongwith some documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-10 and closed the evidence on behalf of the OPs.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.

8. After considering the overall circumstances as enumerated in the complaint and written reply, we find that the factum in regard to travel in a Shatabdi train by the complainant on the relevant day i.e. 17.02.2015, is not in dispute because this factum has not been denied by the OP rather the OP alleged in para No.5 that on 17.02.2015, the complainant had not felt any heavy jerks in the E1 Coach, Seat No.31 in Shatabdi train and moreover, the factum regarding traveling by the complainant in the said train on 17.02.2015 itself established from the complaint made on the complaint register, maintained by the TTE, the copy of the same is available on the file Ex.C1, such like complaint can be made only by the person, who is traveling in the train because the complaint register is lying with the TTE in the said train, now question remains whether there was any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP by providing not an easy traveling to the complainant, whether there is any fault in the coach and due to that fault, heavy jerks was caused to the passenger including complainant, regarding that the complainant has brought on the file a complaint Ex.C1, which relates to the previous traveling of the complainant in the year 2012. So, it means that the jerk was caused in the Shatabdi train even in 2012 and thereafter the complainant produced on the file copy of the complaint Ex.C2 dated 17.02.2015. Apart from that the complainant has brought on the file numerous complaints, made by so many passengers, regarding same fault in the coach of the Shatabdi train i.e. there are heavy jerks in the train, for that purpose, the complaints produced on the file by the complainant of different passengers are Ex.C3 to Ex.C17. So, one thing is established from these complaints that there is a fault in the coach and due to that reason, the passengers felt heavy jerks in the coach of the Shatabdi train, which clearly a deficiency in providing service to the passengers, is established.

9. After traveling in the said train on 17.02.2015, the complainant alleged that he remained admitted in Chodha Hospital, Jalandhar. Due to cervical spondylosis and pain on the lower back, regarding that the complainant has brought on the file prescription slip of the doctor Ex.C7, which shows that the complainant got treatment on 18.02.2015 from the said Hospital but this version of the complainant is controverted by the OP by stating that the complainant was not having a problem of cervical spondylosis or back pain because as per version of the complainant, he was suggested by the doctor to take a rest for 15 days from 18.02.2015 but the counsel for the OP produced on the file his own affidavit Ex.OB, whereby stated that he has procured some information in regard to activities of the complainant, through Facebook and as per message came on the Facebook, the complainant did not take rest, which shows that he was not having any back pain or cervical spondylosis, regarding that the counsel for the OP by filing his affidavit Ex.OB and also produced on the file Facebook Message Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP10, showing that the complainant was present in Radissson Hotel, Jalandhar on 20.02.2015 and he was present in the office of some Newspaper for interview on 21.02.2015 and then on 22.02.2015, he was present in Gurudwara Bangla Sahib, New Delhi and similarly on the different dates, he was present at different places, which shows in the other Facebook messages and as such, the story propounded by the complainant is itself false and frivolous. Apart from the affidavit of the counsel for the OP, the OP has also produced on the file an other affidavit Ex.OPA, whereby reasserted the entire facts as detailed in the written reply.

10. We have sympathetically considered the plea of the OP and find that if we ignore that the complainant was suggested to take 15 days rest even then the factum in regard to deficiency in service on the part of the OP is clearly established because the heavy jerks in the train are established from the complaints filed by different persons, who are not well wisher of the complainant nor having any intimation with the complainant rather they filed complaint at their own level in regard to heavy jerks in the coach of Shatabdi train. So, from the over all circumstances, it is established that the OP has not provided peaceful easy traveling services in the Shatabdi train to the complainant and other passengers and as such the complainant is entitled for the partly relief as claimed in the complaint.

11. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and OPs are directed to refund the amount received by OP from the complainant for travel from New Delhi to Jalandhar and further OPs are directed to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. Complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

12. 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 Parminder Sharma Karnail Singh

20.09.2017 Member President