NEW DELHI: The South Mumbai District’s consumer dispute redressal commission has pulled up IRCTC, the subsidiary of Indian Railways for failing to refund the ticket charges of a train that was cancelled by the Railways due to some unavoidable circumstance.
The forum held that it was mandatory for the firm to refund the amount as the consumer had not availed of its services, and by denying the same, there was a deficiency of service. The forum therefore penalised the firm.
Aniruddha Shembavanekar, a resident of Vile Parle, had booked train tickets in April 2014 of the Howrah Mumbai mail, for his wife and son, who were wanting to travel to Mumbai from Jabalpur in June 2014.
Meanwhile, he was informed that due to some emergency conditions the train was cancelled. Due to this, the complainant had to book a train from Jabalpur to Nagpur and further had to book a flight from Nagpur to Mumbai.
The complainant in October 2014, had informed the firm that till then, he had not received the refund of his ticket’s money. The firm, however, informed him that the Ticket Deposit Receipt (TDR) filing time has been revised to 72 hours and that he has missed out on seeking the refund money.
IRCTC also mentioned that since the railway on its own canceled the train they should have refunded money to the complainant.
Aggrieved by the firm’s behavior, the complainant approached the forum and filed a complaint.
The forum in its orders held that the IRCTC was the firm who had confirmed the ticket along with the travel schedule to the complainant. “It is admitted that said train was canceled due to unavoidable reasons.
Of course, ticket amount has to be refunded. The claim that the complainant had to file its TDR within 72 hours is unsustainable and baseless. Since the railway on its own canceled the train then it quite natural that complainant was entitled to the refund of the amount automatically through IRCTC.
The forum thus ordered the firm to refund the complainant’s ticket amount of Rs 1,855. along with Rs 7,500 towards his mental agony and Rs 2,500 towards his litigation charges.