WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM NORTH ROOM NO.2 OLD CIVIL SUPPLY BUILDING; TIS HAZARI DELHI CASE NO.161/2015 1. Sh. M.K. Verma, S/o Late Sh. R.L. Verma, Aged About 70 years, 2. Mrs. Usha Verma, W/o Sh. M.K. Verma, Aged about 64 years, 3. Mrs. Saroj Verma, D/o Late Sh. R.L. Verma, Aged about 59 years, 4. Ms. Nidhi Verma, D/o Sh. M.K. Verma, Aged about 40 years, 5. Ms. Charu Verma, D/o Sh. M.K. Verma, Aged about 36 years, 6. Sh. Rahul Khasm S/o Sh. Naresh Khas, Aged about 35 years, 7. Master Shivansh Mahendra, S/o Sh. Anuj Mahendra, Through M.K. Verma, Aged about 15 years, 8. Baby Anayam Mahendra, S/o Sh. Anuj Mahendra, Through M.K. Verma, Aged about 12 years, All R/o H.No.117, Jai Laxmi Apartments, I.P. Extension, Delhi-110092.
…….. Complainants
VERSUS 1
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
1. Divisional Railway Manager, (Northen Railway) Old Delhi, Railway Station, Delhi. 2. General Manager (Northen Railway), Baroda House, New Delhi. 3. Chairman Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, Delhi. 4. Union Minister of Railways, Ministry of Railways, Delhi.
...…. Opposite Parties
ORDER K.S. MOHI, PRESIDENT The complainant Sh. M.K. Verma has filed the present complaint against the O.Ps under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts has alleged in the complaint are that the complainant made advance booking of rail, hotel arrangements and AC taxi to be in waiting at Amritsar Railway Station to receive them immediately on their reaching and take them to the hotel and other pre-fixed destinations. It is alleged that in process the complainant had obtained confirmed Railway Ticket for Swarna Shatabdi Express (Train No.12029) for both onward journey on 27.04.2015 as well as return journey also by Swarna Shatabdi Express (Train No.12030) on 28.04.2015 vide PNR No.2103696729 by AC chair car.
It is further
alleged that the aforesaid train was to leave New Delhi Railway Station at 2
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
07:20 hrs. on 27.04.2015 and the schedule arrival time of the train at Amritsar was 13:40 hrs. on 27.04.2015 itself. It is alleged that the cost of tickets for onwards journey was Rs.5,474.94 and that the cost of tickets for return journey was Rs.6,154.94 respectively aggregating to Rs.11,629.88. On 27.04.2015 the complainant and his family members boarded the train at New Delhi Railway station early in the morning and that the train maintained its schedule timing till it reached BIAS Railway Station at about 13:00 hrs. and it was announced that the train would halt at BIAS Railway Station only for 2 minutes but it was not so destined and the ordeal suffered by the complainant and his aforesaid family members including two minor children has been beyond comprehension and imagination. It is further alleged that the aforesaid train did not move at the scheduled time of its departure from the BIAS Railway Station and that it came to a grinding halt without any announcement by the Railway Authorities on public announcement system and when the train remained stopped for hours together without the catering services and even water supply having been withheld by the pantry car of the train, not only the complainant and his family members but other copassengers also became worried and concerned. It is alleged that the Indian Railways which has been largest network in the country did not have the courtesy to make announcement which is commonly heard in the metro when there is any un-scheduled halt in the following terms, “there will be short delay in the journey, kindly bear with us and in convenience is 3
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
regretted.” It is further alleged that unexpectedly at about 17:00 hours i.e. after 4 fours of unscheduled halt of the train at the BIAS Railway Station it was announced that the train would not go to Amritsar and that it would perform return journey from BIAS Railway Station itself and that the passengers should make arrangements to proceed further to Amritsar at their own. It is alleged that leaving with no alternative the complainant with the advance age and failing health had to run hither and thither to find a conveyance of any nature because non conveyance was at all readily available at the BIAS Railway Station.
After making hectic and ceaseless
efforts complainant requested to an Auto driver and the auto driver agreed to take the complainant and his family to Amritsar, purely on humanitarian grounds at an exorbitant rate of Rs.4,000/-.
It is further alleged that on
reaching Amritsar the complainant contacted the taxi driver and was greatly disappointed and upset to know that the taxi driver as per booking came to Amritsar Railway Station at about 01:00 p.m. to fetch the complainant and family members initially to take them to Hyatt Hotel where they had booking and thereafter ferry them to Wagha Border to witness flag ceremony and in the evening for darshan of Swaran Mandir. It is alleged that this is not the end of vows and sorrows of the complainant and his family members. As stated above the complainant and his family had a confirmed reservation by the Swarna Shatabdi Express for next day i.e. 28.04.2015 the schedule time of departure of the train from Amritsar is 16:50 hours. But Amritsar Railway 4
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
Station had no information whatsoever about performance of the return journey of the train.
It is further alleged that to their utter surprise and
shock, on reaching the Amritsar railway station, the complainant was informed that the train shall not be touching Amritsar and shall perform return journey from BIAS Railway Station and that they would have to make their own arrangements to reach the BIAS Railway Station to catch the train. It is alleged that the above statement of facts highlights the dereliction of duty, deficiency in service and gross mismanagement on the part of the O.Ps and that the journey to Amritsar and back by the complainant and his family members which was intended to be a pleasant, enjoyable, comfortable and memorable one, in fact, proved most uncomfortable and a nightmare. It is further alleged that the complainant had to shell out an amount of Rs.10,000/- for taxi charges from Amritsar to Ludhiana because of rampant, uncertainly and no co-operation worth from the O.Ps.
It is alleged that
complainant also paid Rs.20,000/- for his one night stay in Hyatt Hotel, Amritsar on 27.04.2015. The complainant has also sent a legal notice dated 20.05.2015 to the O.Ps but to no avail. On these facts complainant and his family members prays that the O.Ps be directed to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- to each of the 8 persons mentioned above i.e. Rs.16,00,000/alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. and also to pay Rs.40,000/- with interest @ 12% towards expenses incurred by complainant and further payment of
5
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
Rs.11,000/- towards cost of the legal notice including charges for stationary, postage etc. 2.
O.Ps appeared and filed its written statement. In its written statement
O.Ps have taken preliminary objects that the complaint is bad for misjoinder of parties as firstly under DRM/ Old Delhi Railway Station, Delhi, no such officials exists as mentioned in the complaint and secondly as per section 79/80 of CPC the chairman Railway Board and Union Minister Railway cannot be the O.P to any case. It is alleged that best efforts are made to keep the train in time but due to the reasons out of control of Railways, law and orders issues etc. sometimes the trains becomes late and furthermore the passengers safety is given the top priority by the Railways hence the allegations made in the complaint are false and baseless.
It is further
alleged that the complainant has not filed TDR to IRCTC for getting refund as they have taken tickets from IRCTC. It is alleged that the complainant have not approached this Hon’ble Forum with clean hands as he has not mentioned the fact of not filling of TDR and being a lawyer the complainant must be aware of Railway Rules. It is further alleged that the basic issued involve in this case is demand of refund. It is alleged that since 1987 after the enactment of Railways Claim Tribunal Act (RCT) in 1987 refund related issues falls under the jurisdiction of RCT.
On merits O.Ps have not been
disputed that the complainant had obtained railway tickets referred to
6
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
above. It is alleged that the Rajdhani/ Shatabadi Train are most punctual trains, however, the safety of passenger is given prime importance and trains are run keeping in view of safety of passengers and thus there is no negligence on the part of O.Ps. Dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for. 3.
All the complainants have filed their affidavit in evidence testifying all
the facts as alleged in the complaint.
On the other hand Sh. Rahul,
Divisional Comml. Manager/ SS on behalf of O.Ps has filed his affidavit in evidence reiterating all the facts as mentioned in the written statement. Parties have also filed their written submission. 4.
We have carefully gone through the record of the case as well as
written submissions filed by the parties and have also heard submissions Ld. Counsel for the parties. 5.
The controversy involved in the present case is as to whether the
complainants are entitled to the compensation sought in the present complaint. The cursory look at the written statement filed on behalf of O.Ps would show that largely O.Ps have admitted the contents of complaint except that the Consumer Fora has no jurisdiction in view of the authority reported in Hon’ble National Consumer Redressal Commission in Revision Petition No.346/2009 titled as “GM/N. Rly. Vs. Symphony Marketing Pvt. Ltd.” During the course of arguments counsel appearing for O.Ps in all 7
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
fairness conceded that Consumer Fora has the jurisdiction to deal with the matter in question. The contents of written statement filed by O.Ps would further show that main issue regarding harassment raised by complainant have not been specifically answered/ replied by stating that it did not pertain to daily area and the concerned division would be asked to state the fact but subsequently no additional facts were brought on record by O.Ps meaning thereby the contents of the complaint filed by complainant have not been specifically denied by O.Ps which would further mean that the contents of the complaint stood admitted by O.Ps.
The factual position regarding
traveling of complainant and halting of the train at BIAS and on return journey commencement of train not from Amritsar Junction but from Jalandhar Junction have not been denied.
The complainant has placed on
documents, which would show that from BIAS complainants had to make their own arrangement to reach Amritsar and on return journey he had to catch the train from Jalandhar. The facts and circumstances delineated in the complaint would speak by itself about undue hassle, inconvenience, harassment and restlessness of the complainants and their journey and tour to city of Amritsar turned out to be a nightmare. It has come on record that O.Ps had to suspend journey at BIAS Station because of agitation by the farmers. Such incidents do not happen all of a sudden, the Railway might have prior intimation about the protest by farmers on Railway tracks and thus should have not brought the train on track. Even otherwise there was 8
WWW.LIVELAW.IN CASE NO.161/2015
no intimation to the general information or broadcasting by the Indian Railways to apprise the affected passengers about discontinuity of journey. Therefore, the passengers were taken by surprise and the complainants herein had to suffer without any fault of theirs. We feel that it is a fit case where the complainants should be
adequately compensated for the
inconvenience, harassment suffered by them at the hands of O.Ps. 6.
Keeping in view of the discussion stated above, we are of the opinion
that ends of justice would be met, if each complainant is awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/-
totaling
Rs.2,00,000/-
for
harassment,
agony.
The
complainants are also awarded a sum of Rs.16,000/- towards litigation expenses. Ordered accordingly. Announced this 22nd day of September,, 2017.
(K.S. MOHI) President
(SUBHASH GUPTA) Member
Avi
9
