DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA CC.No.564 of 09-12-2010 Decided on 19-07-2011
Satnam Singh S/o Sh. Shivdev Singh, aged about 51 years, R/o Village Jodhpur Romana, District Bathinda. Davinder Kaur W/o Sukhwant Singh, aged about 40 years, R/o Village Punjaban, Tehsil Abohar, District Ferozepur. Surinder Kaur W/o Jaswant Singh, aged about 50 years, R/o village Jodhpur Romana, District Bathinda. .......Complainants
Versus
Union of India, Northern Railways, Baroda House, New Delhi, through its Branch Manager. Divisional Railway Manager, Ambala Division, Northern Railway, Amabala Cantt. Station Master/Station Superintendent, Northern Railway, Bathinda. Concerned Ticket Collector/Coach Incharge, Coach No.S-7, (Train No.5610/Avadh Assam Exp. Dated 21.10.2010), Northern Railway, Bathinda. Muthoot TravelSmart (Agent of opposite parties No.1 to 4), Near Hanuman Chowk, G.T.Road, Grover Complex, Bathinda, through its Prop./Partner/Authorized Signatory/Branch Manager.
......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President. Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member. Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member. Present:- For the Complainant: Sh.Lachhman Kumar, counsel for the complainant. For Opposite parties: Sh.Vinod Garg, counsel for opposite party Nos.1 to 4. Sh. J.D.Nayyar, counsel for opposite party No.5. ORDER
Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President:-
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended up-to-date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). In the instant case, the complainants alongwith their other relatives got 11 sleepers/berths booked (i.e. For the complainants and for other 8 relatives) on 18.10.2010 for traveling on 21.10.2010 from Bathinda to Rudarpur with the opposite parties through opposite party No.5. The opposite party No.5 charged Rs.627/- and issued E-ticket/Transaction ID No.0264022969 for the reservation of three tickets of the complainants. The complainants paid the necessary charges of Rs.627/- for their own tickets and due remaining amount for the remaining 8 tickets was paid by them. At the time of booking of the aforesaid tickets, the complainants were assured that the same are confirmed tickets and the complainants and their relatives could travel in the aforesaid train on 21.10.2010 from Bathinda to Rudarpur by taking sleepers/berths in Coach No.S-7. The complainants alongwith their other relatives reached the Railway Station , Bathinda on 12.30 AM on 21.10.2010. for boarding the train which was scheduled to be departed at 2.00 AM on 21.10.2010. When the complainants, their relatives and son of the complainant No.1 were searching for their berths/sleepers, the opposite party No.4 i.e. Coach/T.C. of Coach No.7 stopped the complainants and their relatives/associates and asked for their tickets. The complainants shown their tickets having berths No.65, 66 and 68 but the complainants and their relatives were conveyed by the opposite party No.4 that there is no berth/sleeper in the name of any of the complainants and did not allow them to board the train and demanded Rs.1,500/- as illegal gratification from the complainants for allowing them to board the train. The complainants enquired about the remaining berths of their relatives as all the other 8 relatives have boarded the train and seated in their respective coaches by taking berths/sleepers. The complainants again approached the opposite party No.4 and apprised him about the fact that the other relatives of the complainants have their respective berths in their name but the opposite party No.4 did not listen to the complainants. The complainants also approached the opposite party No.3 but to no effect. Thereafter, the complainant No.1 moved written complaint on 21.10.2010 itself at 2.30 AM in the complaint book of Railway Department at Serial No.13 but till date, no action has been taken. Since, the departure of the complainants was very necessary for Rudarpur to join the bhog ceremony of close relatives so they have to arrange private taxi and had to spend Rs.35,000/- for 6 days for about 1000 kms. Hence, the complainants have filed the present complaint. 2. The opposite party Nos.1 to 4 have filed their separate joint written statement and have taken legal objections that this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint as only the Railway Claims Tribunal got the exclusive jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint and have taken the support of law laid down by the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in 2008 (2) CLT 93 (NC). The opposite party Nos.1 to 4 have further pleaded that the complainants have concealed the true facts that they purchased the Electronic reservation slip through Internet from the opposite party No.5 and it is clearly mentioned on the said ticket that one of the passengers booked the E-Ticket is required to present any of the identity cards during the journey as proof of identity, failing which all the passengers are to be treated as without ticket. In the present case, none of the complainants had any identity card/proof with them. The complainants were ever told that there is no berth/sleeper available in Coach No.S-7 in the name of any of the complainants. They also denied that they were not allowed to board in the train and any official of the opposite parties ever demanded Rs.1,500/- or any amount as illegal gratification from the complainants. The ticket in question was purchased from the opposite party No.5 through Internet system and there are clear cut instructions mentioned on the ticket that the said ticket is valid only if any of the passengers mentioned in the said ticket, carry identity proof, failing which the passengers carrying such ticket were to be treated as without ticket and fare/fine is to be charged as per rules. The complainants on reaching the Coach S-7 were informed by the TTE concerned that sleeper berths No.65, 66 and 68 are booked against the said tickets. As per rules, the TTE concerned asked for identity proof from any of three complainants. None of the complainant were carrying identity proof which is a condition precedent for traveling with such a ticket. Therefore, the TTE asked for payment of fare/fine from the complainants to which the complainants refused and left the coach. The incident occurred at the platform of Bathinda when the train was standing thereon. When the train left the station, the TTE shown the complainants as none turn up and entered their names in E.D.R. (Exceptional Data Report) so that the complainants could get refund against their tickets. The opposite party Nos.1 to 4 have further pleaded that the complainants have themselves averred that the other eight persons were allowed to travel in the said train and there was no enmity of the TTE with the complainants. So, there was no question of disallowing them to travel in the train, had any of them carrying identity proof as per rules. 3. The opposite party No.5 has filed its separate written statement and pleaded that the responsibility of the opposite party No.5 was to provide confirmed tickets to the complainants. This fact is admitted by the complainants as well as by the opposite party Nos.1 to 4 that the opposite party No.5 had provided proper tickets to the complainants and the same were confirmed tickets. 4. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings. 5. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused. 6. The complainants alongwith other relatives i.e. Kulbir Singh, Gurmeet Kaur, Gurdial Singh, Jagdish Kaur, Sukhbir Kaur, Joginder Kaur, Dalvir Singh and Ramjit Kaur had to go to attend the bhog ceremony at Rudarpur city on 24.10.2010. For that, the complainants had got booked 11 sleepers/berths in all on 18.10.2010 for traveling on 21.10.2010 from Bathinda to Rudarpur with the opposite parties. The opposite party No.5 on behalf of all the opposite parties, charged Rs.627/- vide E-ticket/Transaction ID No.0264022969 for the reservation of three tickets of the complainants. At the time of booking of the aforesaid tickets, the complainant Satnam Singh delivered a photocopy of his PAN No.BGRPS1246L as ID proof. At the time of booking of the aforesaid tickets, the complainants were assured that these tickets are confirmed tickets and the complainants and their relatives could travel in the aforesaid train on 21.10.2010 from Bathinda to Rudarpur by taking sleeper/berth. These tickets were confirmed for Coach No.S-7. Satnam Singh has deposed in his affidavit Ex.C-3 that he alongwith his other relatives reached the Railway Station, Bathinda on 12.30 AM on 21.10.2010. for boarding the train which was scheduled to be departed at 2.00 AM on 21.10.2010. The complainant Satnam Singh was having original as well as photocopy of his aforesaid PAN Card and also the original Voter Card so that he could be able to deliver the copies to the concerned authority. When the complainants and their relatives were boarding the train, the opposite party No.4 i.e. Coach/T.C. of Coach No.7 stopped the complainants and their relatives/associates and asked for their tickets. The complainants shown their tickets having berths No.65, 66 and 68 but the complainants and their relatives were conveyed by the opposite party No.4 that there is no berth/sleeper in the name of any of the complainants and did not allow them to board the train and demanded Rs.1,500/- as illegal gratification from the complainants for allowing them to board the train. 7. Sh. Sher Singh has deposed in his affidavit Ex.C-4 that he is driver by profession and he is owner of Taxi bearing registration No.PB-30E/6620 which is registered with Janta Taxi Union, Bathinda and holding a valid Driving License valid upto 09.06.2013. Satnam Singh contacted the Sher Singh and engaged the Taxi for Rudarpur and he charged Rs.35,000/- for six days for about 1000 kms. 8. The opposite parties did not allow the complainants to board the train. They were asked to prove the Identity card but there was no ID card in the possession any of the complainants. It is mandatory to produce the ID card, when asked. Ex.C-1 clearly depicts that :- “One of the passenger booked on an E-ticket is required to present any of the identity cards noted below in original during the train journey and same will be accepted as a proof of identity failing which all the passengers will be treated as traveling without ticket and shall be dealt as per extant Railway Rules. Valid Ids:- Voter Identity Card/Passport/PAN Card/Driving License/Photo ID Card issued by Central/State Govt./Student Identity Card with photograph issued by recognized School/College for their students/ Nationalized Bank Passbook with photograph/Credit Cards issued by Banks with laminated photograph. The accommodation booked is not transferable and is valid only if one of the ID card noted above is presented during the journey. The passenger should carry with him the electronic Reservation Slip print out. In case the passenger does not carry the electronic reservation slip, a charge of Rs.50/- per ticket shall be recovered by the ticket checking staff and an excess fare ticket will be issued in lieu of that.” 9. At the top of this E-Ticket, it is specifically mentioned that:- “This E-Ticket will only be valid along with an ID proof. If found traveling without ID Proof, Passenger will be treated as without ticket and charged as per extant Railway Rules.” Nowhere on this ticket, it has been mentioned that the complainants have produced their identity cards while booking these tickets. Even a single word with regard to producing/showing identity cards at the time of boarding the train by the complainants has been written in their complaint, though the complainant No.1 has deposed in his affidavit that he has given the photocopy of PAN No.BGRPS1246L as ID proof. This affidavit has been given by the complainant after going through the written statement of the opposite parties. As the written statement has been filed by the opposite party Nos.1 to 4 on 09.02.2011 and 14.02.2011 (i.e. by the opposite party No.5) and the affidavit Ex.C-3 has been tendered on 13.05.2011. Further, there is no affidavits of the complainant Nos.2&3 placed on file, the joint complaint is also signed by Satnam Singh only, which clearly shows that the allegation levelled against the opposite parties are baseless. 10. The allegation with regard to illegal gratification, asked by TC is also baseless and without any evidence. The complainants have themselves submitted that they alongwith other 8 relatives have to board the train from Bathinda to Rudarpur, Ex.R-2 confirms this. When, the opposite party No.4 found that the complainants Satnam Singh, Davinder Kaur and Surinder Kaur were not holding any identity card to show their identities, he disallowed the complainants to sit on berths/sleepers and asked for fare and fine but at no time has asked them not to board the train. The complainants have themselves failed to produce their identity cards or to pay fine or fare and left the coach. Hence, the opposite party No.4 has rightly done his duty. 11. The complainants had purchased the E-tickets through Internet as mentioned above. No affidavit of any other person/relatives (i.e. of remaining 8 relatives) is placed on file to support/prove the version of the complainants who were traveling in that train in which the complainants have to book their seats. Neither they are impleaded as party nor any affidavit on their part has been placed on file to prove the version of the complainants as they were best persons/witnesses to the said incident. 12. Therefore, in view of what has been discussed above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, this complaint is dismissed without any order as to cost. 13. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned for record. ' Pronounced 19.07.2011 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni) President
(Sukhwinder Kaur) (Amarjeet Paul) Member Member |
