- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 14.9.10, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bilaspur (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short) in complaint case No. 277/06, whereby the complaint of the appellant herein alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and claiming compensation for that, has been dismissed on the ground that there was no deficiency in service.
(2.) FACTS of the case are that the appellants were required to go from Bilaspur to Kotma and were to come back after two days from there. Tickets were reserved by train No. 405 from Bilaspur to Kotma and train No. 406 from Kotma to Bilaspur in coach No. S -2. Berths were allotted and so far as the journey from Bilaspur to Kotma was concerned, it was properly performed on 6.6.06. Return journey was to be performed from Kotma to Bilaspur on 8.6.06 and in the ticket, the time of departure from Kotma was shown as 00:05, whereas such ticket was issued on 5.6.06. On 8.6.06 the complainants went to the Station Kotma accordingly well in advance and were waiting for the train, but there it was informed to them that the train has already left the Station at 22.50. Then written complaint was made by the complainants to the Stationmaster and Stationmaster informed that the time schedule of the train has been changed from 3.6.06, Alleging deficiency in service on part of respondent in issuing ticket showing wrong date and time of departure of train, in this way the consumer complaint was filed before District Forum, seeking compensation for physical harassment and metal agony.
(3.) THE respondent/Railway, in reply of the complaint has refuted the allegation of deficiency in service and averred that the departure time printed in the ticket was subject to change, as per clear cut instructions written on computerized reservation ticket. It has also been averred that the time schedule of the train was changed from 3.6.06 and due publicity regarding change of time schedule was given. Even when the complainants purchased tickets from the counter, at that time also, they were informed that the time schedule has been changed. Thus, the complainants were having information regarding change of time schedule. Otherwise also, as per Railway Coaching Tariff, the Railway is not liable for return of fare on account of change of time schedule. In view of these pleadings, it has been prayed that the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Learned District Forum after having considered the rival contentions of both parties, came to the conclusion that as per the Coaching Tariff No. 26, Part I (Volume I), Rule 115, the time of arrival and departure of the trains are not guaranteed and as per Tariff No. 26, Rule 213 (B) (6), sometimes some trains may left Station before time and in such cases, the Railway will not be liable to refund the fare. On the basis of these rules and on the basis of affidavit of Railway Employee, it was observed that no deficiency in service has been committed by the Railway.;