Order below section 36(2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019

 Per M.P.Kasar, Member

Heard Complainant in person. Perused Complaint filed by the complainant and document annexed along with complaint at the stage of admission of complaint below section 36(2) of CPAct.

It is observed that ,allegations made in complaint by the complainant are pertaining to both opposite parties are charging exorbitantly for AClocals According to complainant Non A.C.,first class ticket and pass holder are not allowed to migrate or upgrade, if they want to AC locals it is why ? also AC locals operate during peak hours are not favourable for non AC commuters when  travelling in crowded trains. Hence according to complainant there is unfair trade practice, breach of trust, malpractices negligence, cost of complaint, cost of litigation be imposed with compensation for mental agony and harassment  and penalty be imposed  on opposite parties for increasing crowds and choes on AC locals by introducing AC locals without streamlining non AC locals.

We framed issue as follows

1. Whether present complaint can be admit against opposite parties?.. No
2.  What an order ? complaint rejected against opposite parties

As to issue No.1 :-We perused section 35(1) of Consumer Protection Act 2019, ‘A complaint in relation to any goods sold or delivered or agreed to be sold or delivered  or  any service provided or agreed to be provided, may be filed with district commission ....’

Thus allegations made by the complainant in present complaint against opposite parties are   pertaining to opposite parties  rendering its services are bad in nature and due to that ,non AC pass holders suffers and  due to services crowed increases. From the perusal of complaint we noted that, complaint revels opposite parties while rendering services  committing service deficiency, unfair trade practice ,mal practice and negligence  hence violation of rights of consumers as a class and we are of the opinion that, the issues raised by the complainant in complaint is subject matter of section 17 of  The Consumer  Protection Act 2019.Though according to complainant he suffers due services being rendered by opposite parties but in which manner complainant individually suffered is not substantiated by the complainant  .So opposite parties cannot be held liable  individually to complainant at this point as complainant failed to prove that, there is directly deficiency in services or opposite parties adopted unfair trade practices towards complainant in regard services availed from opposite parties by the complainant as interpreted in section 35(1) of CP Act 2019 we are of the opinion that present complaint cannot be admitted against opposite parties below section 36(2) of CPAct 2019 at the admission stage.

Considering findings derived from the above issues we pass order as follows:

                                            ORDER

1. CC N.22/36 is hereby rejected against opposite parties below section 36(2) of Consumer Protection Act 2019
2. No order as to cost.