SATYA PAL SINGH vs ADARSH DEV SHARMA

HEARD Mr. R. K. Gupta, learned Counsel for the appellants in both the appeals. However, none responds on behalf of the two respondents namely Dr. Adarsh Dev Sharma and Mr. Mahendra Singh.

BOTH these appeals haven arisen out of one and the same judgment dated 10. 3. 2003 passed by District Consumer Forum, Bullandshahr. By virtue of the judgment in appeal the District Consumer Forum, Bullandshahr allowed the Complaint Nos. 202/2001 and 203/2001 filed by Dr. Adarsh Dev Sharma and Mr. Mahendra Singh respectively and thereby awarded Rs. 2,000 each as damages for the deficiency in service. Both the complainants had a common case. They had alleged that they travelled by U. P. Roadways Bus No. UP 80t 9563 from Aligarh on 15. 4. 2001 at 10. 00 p. m. for their journey to Bullandshahr. The bus driver and conductor had dropped them at Bhud Chauraha at the Bullandshahr bypass road instead the bus station located in the city. As it was about mid night they did not get any vehicle for going to their home. They had to track a distance of about more than 3 kms. at the cost of their security.

As the driver and conductor of the bus did not accede to the request of the two passengers for going to the bus station they were held guilty of deficiency in service. The two other opposite parties namely U. P. Roadways Corporation and Regional Depot Manager, were absolved of their liability as it was held that it was on account of personal mistake of the driver and the conductor that the deficiency in service had occurred.

THE two appellants pleaded before the District Consumer Forum that the complainants'' version was absolutely wrong. They submitted further that the bus was driven to bus stand where the two passengers were alighted from the bus. In addition it was mentioned that the bus was also taken to the workshop for minor repairs of the heads lights. A counter-foil of the receipt indicating such repairs was filed in support of defence version. The District Consumer Forum did not believe the appellants'' case of their having gone to the roadways bus station at Bullandshahr rather held that two passengers besides two others were dropped at Bhud Chauraha of the bypass road from where they were forced to walk on foot. Learned Counsel appearing for the two appellants has contended that the document, a copy whereof is Annexure-1 on the file of Appeal No. 1175/2003 was neither discussed nor referred to in the judgment while recording the finding by the District Consumer Forum. It is further submitted that had this document been placed reliance upon, the judgment could have been different that what was delivered. We are afraid, this contention does not carry any weight. A perusal of this document appears to indicate that it is an O. K. Certificate issued by the Service Workshop of the U. P. Roadways Corporation. This document at the most proves that it was issued by the Service Workshop. Although it bears a round seal of the U. P. Roadways Corporation, Inquiry Office of Bullandshahr Depot but it is difficult to reconcile this seal with the document of service workshop. In case the bus was driven to the U. P. Roadways bus stand its entry should have been made in the prescribed register and a certificate duly issued by the Depot Manager should have been filed but that course has not been adopted instead the O. K. Certificate issued by the workshop was pressed into service along with seal of Inquiry Office. It remains shrouded in the mystery as to how the seal of bus station was affixed on the receipt of workshop. Since no explanation has been offered to justify the affixation of seal on the workshop receipt, possibility of it being manipulated cannot be ruled out. A pertinent question would arise that if two passengers were dropped at the Roadways bus station why they would have filed the complaint? No answer has been given from the side of the two appellants. What significant to note is that one of the two complainants is a Doctor who had gone to attend a meeting of the Indian Medical Association and was returning from Agra via Aligarh and the other complainant is Branch Manager of Indian Bank. Both these persons were of status and they should not have unnecessarily bothered themselves at the cost of their time, energy and money to have filed false complaints against the appellants. Apart that, they established their case beyond doubt by filing their affidavits.

HAVING regard to the facts and circumstances of this case we are inclined to endorse the judgment in appeal and hold that both the appeals are devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed. Both the appeals are dismissed. The judgment shall be placed on the record of Appeal No. 1174/2003 while its copy will be laid on the record of Appeal No. 1175/2003. Appeals dismissed.