CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – X
GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel)
New Delhi – 110016
Case No.669/2010
AJAY KUMAR
SON OF SHRI RAJ KUMAR PRASAD,
R/O HOUSE NO. 60, SECTOR-28,
BEHIND TAYAL MOTORS, FARIDABAD
HARYANA- 121008…..COMPLAINANT
Vs.
- M/s MEGA CORPORATION LTD.,
NSIC COMPLEX, MAA ANAND MAYEE MARG,
OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PHASE-III,
NEW DELHI – 20 THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR/ DIRECTOR/ COMPETENT AUTHORIZED PERSON.
- SHRI SURENDRA NAHATA, HEAD- DELHI- NCR,
M/s MEGA CORPORATION LTD.,
NSIC COMPLEX, MAA ANAND MAYEE MARG,
OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,
PHASE-III, NEW DELHI- 20…..RESPONDENT/ OP
Date of Institution-21.12.2010
Date of Order- 26.09.2022
O R D E R
RASHMI BANSAL– Member
The complainant in the present complaint filed against OP, a radio taxi provider, for providing deficient service as taxi did not
reach at scheduled time and complainant had to miss his train and prayed for compensation on account of harassment, mental torture and agony along with costs of litigation.
- Complainant availed OP’s taxi service at 11:15 AM for 15:30 Hrs for reaching to New Delhi Railway Station on 28.11.2009 to board train at 16:55 from Hazart Nizamuddin railway station. The said booking was instantly confirmed by the OP on 28.11.2009 by an email sent to the complainant on his email id and by confirmation SMS, with booking reference no. 510 at 11:15 AM. OP also sent a message to complainant intimating the mobile number of the taxi driver and vehicle no. telling him that taxi would reach by 15:30 Hrs.
- It is the case of the complainant that he kept waiting for the taxi but neither did the taxi come in time nor any intimation was received by the complainant in this regard till 15:40 Hrs. The complainant anxiously called up the call centre of the OP which kept saying that taxi will reach there soon. He tried searching for alternate taxi/conveyance but could not find any, as sufficient time required to reach to station was lost. The driver of the booked taxi reached to complainant by 16:30 Hrs, by which time complainant already became late and could not reach station on time and he missed the train. Complainant stated that it was very urgent for him to reach to Mumbai, therefore, he had book flight on 29.11.09. The complainant had registered his complaint against OP to his senior officers on 28.11.2009, 01.12.2009 and 20.12.2009 demanding the financial loss he has suffered because of the lapse on the part of OP amounting to Rs. 1,61,214/- including Rs. 5814/- towards flight ticket, Rs. 700/- towards payment to taxi, Rs. 4700/- towards payment made to agent for cancellation of the hotel booked at Mumbai and Rs. 1,50,000/- towards mental agony, harassment and tension that he had suffered due to deficiency in service on the part of OP.
- OP in response of the same has sent a banker cheque of Rs. 2,000/- towards refund of railway ticket, which was not accepted by complainant and he returned it back to OP on 05.02.2010. A legal notice dated 25.03.2010 was sent to OP by complainant, which OP has replied vide its letter dated 20.04.2010, admitting the booking of the taxi, information given about the mobile of the driver and the vehicle number and the delay in reaching the taxi on time due to break down of the said taxi. This is also admitted that the driver of the vehicle, as well as the call centre keep informing complainant that vehicle would soon reach to the pick- up point and there is no intentional fault at its end.
- Upon notice, OP chose not to appear and as such has been proceeded ex-parte on 04.08.2014. The complainant has filed his ex-parte evidence and written arguments.
- Complainant has filed the following documents as evidence:
a. Cancelled railway ticket – Ex. CW1/A
b. Flight booking e-ticket – Ex. CW1/B
c. Receipts of the taxi fare – Ex. CW1/D
d. Copy of the returned train ticket – Ex. CW1/E
e. Complaint dated 20.12.2010 to OP’s official, Ex.CW1/F
f. Copy of the letter and pay order of Rs. 2000/- sent to complainant by OP- Ex. CW1/G
g. Letter of complainant dated 05.02.2010 returning 2000/- to OP, Ex. CW1/ H
h. Legal notice dated 25.03.2010 sent to OP - Ex. CW1/I
i. Reply dated 20.04.2010 by OP to the legal notice of complainant – Ex. CW1/J
- Payment to agent for cancellation of hotel and taxi is marked as Ex. CW1/C by the complainant in his evidence however, there is no document available on record, pertaining to this, neither in evidence or the complaint of the complainant.
- We have carefully considered all the document present on record. Since OP proceeded ex-parte, therefore all the averments made by the complainant in his complaint are deemed to admitted by OP. Perusal of the documents establishes that OP failed to fulfil the obligation which he has undertaken to be performed and acted in negligence in the manner of performance in relation to providing the taxi service to the complainant on time, because of which complainant had to suffer financially as well as mentally, which act amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP. The purpose of pre-booking of the taxi by the complainant was to have a comfortable ride as per the schedule of the complainant which was frustrated because of the poor and deficient services on the part of OP. In the absence of evidence towards the money paid for cancellation of the hotel, the same cannot be awarded to the complainant. The Commission deemed it fit and proper in the circumstances of the case to award a compensation of Rs. 7500/- towards financial losses suffered by the complainant, Rs. 25,000/- towards deficient service that caused harassment, mental agony and tension to the complainant, and 5000/- towards cost of litigation, to be paid by OP within 90 days from the date of order, failing which the entire amount shall bear an interest @9% p.a. till actual realisation by the complainant.
- The consumer complaint could not be decided within time due to heavy pendency of the cases before Commission.
- The order be uploaded on website and a copy of the order be given to the parties in terms of the Consumer Protection act, 1986.
- The order contains 5 pages, each bears my signature.
(Dr. RAJENDER DHAR) (RASHMI BANSAL) (MONIKA SRIVASTAVA)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
