SANJAY KUMAR SEN Vs. C E S C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -The facts leading to this Revision Petition are that the present Respondent Mr. K. Thiruvengadam had filed the complaint before the District Forum, Thanjavur against the General Manager, Southern Railway, Assistant Secretary, Public Grievances Cell and Chief Commercial Superintendent who are officers of the Southern Railway. According to the allegations contained in the complaint, the complainant had approached the Southern Railway at Thanjavur on 12th September, 1992 with written application in the prescribed format for reservation of seats in 1st class for his family consisting of five members from Thanjavur to Howrah via Madras without any break in the journey on route and also for the return ticket. He also paid reservation charges. The journey was to start on 22nd September, 1990. He was issued five tickets for the journey from Thanjavur to Howrah and the same number of tickets from Howrah to Thanjavur. The specified amount for the tickets was paid by the Complainant. The Complainant had intimated his friends in Calcutta about his arrival and all of them were eager to receive him and his family during the Puja holidays. In between the date of purchasing the tickets and the date of the actual commencement of the journey there was no communication by the Sourthern Railway to the Complainant. As planned the Complainant commenced his journey on 22nd September, 1990 from Thanjavur and reached Madras on 23rd September, 1990. From Madras Egmore the Complainant and his family had to travel to Madras Central Station in Taxi for catching the train for Howrah. On reaching Madras Central Station the Complainant found that their names were missing from the reservation chart. Their names were also missing in the waiting list chart. The Complainant tried accommodation in the. Ilnd class for himself and his family but could not get the same. The Complainant made attempts to get refund of unused portion of tickets but he was unsuccessful. The Complainant and his family had to stay in Madras in private lodges and had to spent huge amount which they had to borrow from friends. After several reminders about the refund, the Chief Commercial Superintendent made refund of some money withholding certain percentage of money as cancellation charges. Thereafter the Complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Thanjavur claiming Rs. 18,600/- as damages on account of various items.

(2.) Respondents were duly served with notices of the complaint and an advocate appeared on their behalf and requested time for filing counter. Despite a couple of adjournments the advocate did not file any counter on the ground that he had not received any information and details of facts for preparing the counter.

(3.) In support of his case the Complainant filed an affidavit. The District Forum, believed the allegations of the Complainant and allowed Rs. 18,600/- as compensation to him plus Rs. 400/- as cost of the proceedings. The District Forum further ordered that in case the above amount was not paid within the period fixed in the order, the Opposite Parties would undergo simple imprisonment for one year under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act).