- (1.) THE complaint of the appellant herein, has been dismissed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short), in Complaint Case No. 69/2008, vide order dated 17.9.2010, on the ground that in view of provision of Section 13(1)(b) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 , the complaint is not maintainable before the District Forum.
(2.) IN nutshell, the complaint of the appellant/complainant before the District Forum was that appellant was having a general sleeper class ticket and was travelling in Howrah -Kurla Express, then TTE of that coach allotted him a berth and recovered amount of Rs. 118 and thus, excess amount has been charged by the TTE, whereas fixed rate was Rs.102 and complainant was also a senior citizen. Alleging these as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, a consumer complaint was filed before the District Forum.
(3.) COUNSEL for the appellant has argued that as there were allegations of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, and therefore the complaint was maintainable before the District Forum. We do not agree with this argument. In view of provision of Section 13(l)(b) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 , the jurisdiction of a Civil Court or other Court, is barred, and in view of provision of Sub -clause (b) of Section 13(1) of the Act, allclaims regarding refund of fare or part thereof, are only maintainable before such Tribunal and not before the Consumer Fora. The same view was expressed by us in order dated 21.7.2010 in Appeal No. 230/2010, Kushal Chand Jain v. South Eastern Central Railways and Another. The receipt filed by the appellant also shows that amount of Rs. 118 was recovered as fare. TTE might have said something else in his statement, but document shows that it was fare and its refund can only be claimed before lawfully established Railway Claims Tribunal.;