ORDER

SMT.SHARAVATHI S.M.  MEMBER

1. This is the Complaint filed by the Complainant U/S Section 35 of consumer protection Act 2019, against the opposite party (herein referred in short as op) alleging the deficiency in service in deducting Toll fee of Rs.25/- on 21/11/2021 through Paytm Fastag and for compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for the hardship, financial loss, mental agony caused to him and also litigation charges and for other reliefs as the commission deems fit.

2.     The brief facts of the complaint are that:-  the opposite party M/s Navayuga Bangalore Toll Way Private Limited is a private incorporated company. The Managing Director and Head office is at Hyderabad, Telangana. It has a Branch office at M/S Navayuga Bangalore Tollway Private Ltd, Bangalore-Mangalore Highway, Sadashiva Nagar, Nelamangala Town, Bangalore rural district.

3.     It is contended in the complaint that the complainant travelled from 8^th Mile, T. Dasarahalli to Adakamaranahalli, Bangalore north Taluk, for the purpose of admitting her child to Morarji Residential School on 21/11/2021 at about 3:00 pm. He went through the service road by his Hyundai  i10 car bearing No.KA04 MF 3534. He used the service road as there is no deviation to Adamaranahalli from Nelamangala Toll plaza road. After returning from Adakamarakanahalli to T. Dasarahalli by using service road at about 4.00 pm, he got a message to his mobile that Rs.25/- is deducted from his paytem Fastag wallet, on that day at about 04:13 pm from Navayuga Bangalore. vide Fastag ID 34161FA820328E40131C9580. After he checked his Paytm wallet, Rs.25/- was deducted from his account, even though he did not use the Toll road. He issued a notice to the OP to refund the amount as the said amount has been deducted from his Paytm account as Toll fee though he did not use the regular road. The notice was not at all replied even though it was received on 01.12.2021. On 08.12.2021 a sum of Rs.25/- has been credited to his account by OP without sending reply to the notice. The illegal deduction of the amount through his Fastag Account which has put him financial loss, mental agony. OP has practiced restrictive trade practices by deducting the Toll from his Fastag account eventhough he had not utilized the Toll road, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence prayed the commission to pay a compensation of Rs.2 lakhs for causing him financial loss, mental agony and cost of the complaint. 

4.     Upon service of notice through RPAD, op did not receive the notice in spite of being intimated by the postal authorities and the same was returned as not claimed and hence this commission held the service of notice as sufficient notice and placed it exparte for its absence.

5.     In order to prove the case complainant filed affidavit evidence and produced documents. Arguments heard. The following points arise for our consideration:-

1. Whether the complainant has proved unfair trade practice played by the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?

6.     Our answers to the above points are:-

POINT NO 1 & 2: IN THE NEGATIVE

                         For the following.

REASONS

POINT NO 1 & 2:-

7.     On perusal of the affidavit evidence and documents produced by the complainant, it becomes clear that the complainant travelled on that day from the 8^th mile, T Dasarahalli to Adakamaranahalli, Bangalore North Taluk to visit Morarji Desai Residential school to admit her child on 21/11/2021 at about 3.00 p.m. There is no evidence placed by the complainant that he travelled through service road by his Hyundai I10 bearing Registration No.KA 04 MF 3535. It at all he has used the service road they would not have raised the receipt for collecting the toll fee through the Fastag and the amount would not have been debited from the said account.

8.     It becomes clear from Ex-P2 and Ex-P3 that Paytm Fastag payment has been made and deducted Rs.25/- as detailed in the said document. Though it is stated by the complainant in the complaint that he has received Rs.25/- to his account standing with SBI from the OP, after issuing the legal notice, the bank statement has not been placed before this commission to believe that the said amount has been returned to the complainant.  Also there is no materials placed by the complainant to prove the unfair trade practice and restrictive trade practice alleged by the complainant against the OP.  In view of this we are of the firm opinion that absolutely there is no evidence to prove the said facts. Complainant has miserably failed to provide the proof of the same. Hence the complainant is not entitle for any of the reliefs prayed and we answer POINT NO.1 AND 2 IN THE NEGATIVE and pass the following:-

ORDER

1. The Complaint is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost.
2. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.      

Note: You are hereby directed to take back the extra copies of the Complaints/version, documents and records filed by you within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

(Dictated to the Stenographer over the computer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this day the 13^TH day of SEPTEMBER 2022)

MEMBER                 MEMBER                   PRESIDENT

ANNEXURES

1. Witness examined on behalf of the Complainant/s by way of affidavit:

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Complainant/s:

Ex P1: Copy of the RC Book

Ex P2: Copy of the  Fast Tag Payment details.

Ex P3: Copy of the Fast Tag receipts.

Ex P4: Copy of the Legal notice.

Ex P5: Postal acknowledgment.

 2. Witness examined on behalf of the Opposite party/s by way of affidavit:

RW-1: - Nil -

Copies of Documents produced on behalf of Opposite Party/s

- Nil-

MEMBER                 MEMBER                PRESIDENT

RAK*