(The appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 28.09.2011, upon hearing the arguments of both sides and perused the documents, written submissions as well as the order of the District Forum, this Commission made the following order :-)
A.K.ANNAMALAI, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant.
2. Complainant traveled in the 1st opposite partys State Transport Express Bus, Ultra Delux bus in which 2nd and 3rd opposite parties are driver and conductor. On 10.12.09 from Trichy to Pumba on payment of Rs.340/- started at 22.00 hours from Trichy and after reaching Dindigul due to certain repair the bus could not be proceeded further and thereby the 2nd and 3rd opposite parties have not made any alternative arrangements and thereafter the complainant on his own alternative arrangements reached the Pumba with delay of several hours and thereby the opposite parties are deficiency in service and after returning from the place on 15.12.06 when he questioned the 1st opposite party he demanded for the return of the ticket purchased and as the opposite parties have to refund the money towards the fare for the unavailed portion of the journey which is deficiency of service and thereby complainant claimed Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and refund of the ticket fare and for the unavailed portion of journey and for costs.
3. The opposite parties denied the allegations of the complainant by contending that due to unexpected mechanical defect which is an act of God break down occurred at Dindigul and up to Theni they have made alternative arrangements by making passengers to continue the onward journey with good Ultra Delux bus and the other passengers have no complaint in this regard and the complainant refused to get back the ticket fare at the spot as he was not willing to continue the journey and the sum of Rs.256/- as part of unavailed journey was sent by money order to the complainant on 19.12.06 and thereby there was no deficiency of service and the complainant was so reluctant with an ulterior motive filed the complaint only to threaten and extract money from the opposite parties.
4. On the basis of both sides materials and after an enquiry the District Forum dismissed the complaint by stating that the complainant failed to prove the deficiency of service.
5. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum the appellant come forward with this appeal contending that the District Forum erroneously allowed the complaint without taking in to consideration and thereby appeal to be allowed.
6. While considering both sides contentions and averments it is the admitted case of both sides that the complainant traveled in the Ultra Delux bus of the opposite party in which 2nd and 3rd opposite parties were functioning as conductor and driver on payment of Rs.340/- as ticket charges from Trichy to Pumba on 10.12.2009 and on reaching Dindigul the bus was not proceeded due to break down of mechanical defects which alleged an act of God by the opposite parties and thereafter the complainant had not continued his journey in the alleged alternative arrangement made by the opposite parties. It is the case of the complainant that they have not made any such alternative arrangements and he was left in lurch to reach his destinated place Pumba. But the opposite parties contended they have made arrangements with same type of Ultra Delux bus to continue the journey and all other passengers have availed the same and the complainant refused to get the refund on his spot itself. It is also admitted by the complainant that the 1st opposite party demanded his ticket at Trichy when he came and enquired on 15.12.09 regarding the break down of the bus which shows that he had not offered his ticket for refund and is also proved by the opposite parties side on receiving back the ticket from him on 19.12.09, the proportionate unavailed bus fare of Rs.256 was sent by money order to the complainants address which was received on behalf of the complainant by his women representative as detailed under Exhibit B1 money order receipt. Complainant not produced any other proof or materials to prove that he had actually suffered and undergone ordeal because of break of journey from Dindigul either by way of any affidavit from other passengers traveled along with him or by producing the travel documents by alternative arrangements from Trichy to Theni to Theni Kumili, Kumili to Pumba. He has produced only copy of the computerized ticket issued by the 1st opposite party and the letter addressed to the 1st opposite party and legal notice sent and no other documents to expose his alleged sufferings and also no evidence to prove that the opposite parties failed to make alternative arrangements as soon as the break down was occurred. The opposite parties being the State owned Public Transport Corporation and when it is contended due to unexpected circumstances because of break down the journey could not be continued with the same bus and they have stated that they have made alternative arrangements as soon as possible which was not controverted by the complainant in any other mode of proof or evidence and thereby the District Forum considered all the aspects from either side materials and came to the proper conclusion that the complainant failed to prove the negligence or deficiency on the part of the opposite parties and thereby rightly dismissed the complaint. In those circumstances we are of the view that there is no need for any interference in the finding of the District Forum. Therefore we are of the view that there is no need for any interference and the appeal deserves to be dismissed as devoid of merits.
7. In the result the appeal is dismissed by confirming the order of the District Forum, Tiruchirappalli in C.C.No.10/2010 dated 13.08.2010. No order as to costs in this appeal.