T.B.O. TRAVELS vs KOTA SURYANARAYANA

AFTER hearing the Learned Counsel for the Appellant and Respondents and perusing the records, the Commission delivered the following:

THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 8.1.91 passed by the District Forum, Bangalore in Complaint No. 435 of 90 on its file. It arises in this way:- The first respondent had come to Bangalore on 26.5.1990 alongwith his wife for honeymoon. He purchased two tickets for Rs. 450/- each from the appellant for going to Ooty and coming back to Bangalore. The appellant is alleged to have promised him that they would be taken in a Video Coach Bus to Ooty. But they were taken in a Swaraj Mazda Van. They were made to sit in the cabin of that van on seats which had poor upholstry and which were on the wheel of the bus. Hence, their journey was not so comfortable as they had expected it to be. They were also not brought to Bangalore in that van by the 2nd Respondent. Hence they had to traval in another bus by paying Rs. 100/- each while returning to Bangalore. Hence Respondent No. 1 filed a complaint before the District Forum claiming compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for the discomfort and unhappiness suffered by himself and his wife. Notices were sent to the appellant and the Respondent No. 2. They were returned with the endorsement of refusal. Respondent No. 2 was served and the notice to the appellant was returned with the endorsement of refusal.

The District Forum held that both the appellant and Respondent No. 2 had been properly served. The Respondent No. 1 filed an affidavit in support of his complaint and produced the tickets issued by the appellant to him and other tickets issued to him by the hotel, etc. On that material, the District Forum awarded compensation or Rs. 5,000/- to Respondent No. 1 and his wife from the appellant and the complaint was dismissed as against the Respondent No. 2. Hence, this appeal by the appellant, who was Respondent No. 1 before the District Forum.

MR. Gangadarappa, learned Counsel for the appellant urged that the appellant is the agent of Respondent No. 2 and therefore the District Forum ought to have made Respondent No. 2 to pay the compensation. The Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2 denied the contention of MR. Gangadarappa that the appellant was working as an agent of Respondent No. 2 and that Respondent No. 2 was the owner of the van. Under the circumstances, it was up to the appellant to prove and to produce some documents or some evidence to show that he was acting as the agent of Respondent No. 2 and Respondent No. 2 was the owner of the van in which Respondent No. 1 and his wife as travelled. As no evidence is produced regarding the same, we are unable to accept the said contention of MR. Gangadarappa. The Second contention of Mr. Gangadarappa is that looking to the circumstances of the case, the compensation awarded by the District Forum is excessive. In the ticket, the number of the vehicle for which the ticket had been issued is mentioned and it is not disputed that Respondent and his wife travelled in the same van. In the ticket the number of the seats of Respondent No. 1 and his wife were noted as 21 & 22. So they ought to have been provided accommodation on those two seats. But according to the First Respondent they were made to sit in the cabin of the van on seats with poor upholstry and so their journey was not comfortable. That has not been denied by the appellant. Respondent No. 1 who is an Advocate has filed an affidavit, stating that he had to return to Bangalore in another bus by paying Rs. 100/- each. That fact has also, not been denied. The discomfort and unhappiness to him and his wife has been established. The District Forum has not given reasons for fixing the compensation at Rs. 5,000/-. The District Forum has stated that ends of justice will be met if the first opposite party is made liable to pay a sum Rs. 5,000/- as/compensation for the hardship and inconvenience suffered by the complainant and his wife during the course of their journey from Bangalore to Ooty and back. Respondent No. 1 has stated that while coming back, he has travelled in another bus by paying Rs. 100/ each and so he is entitled to refund of Rs, 200/- spent by him. It is not his case that the suffered any hardship or inconvenience while travelling from Ooty to Bangalore in that bus. Looking to all the circumstances and regard being had to the amount of the tickets, we think a compensation of Rs. 2,000/- will suffice.

IN the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the order of the District Forum is modified by reducing the compensation from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 2,000/-. The said amount shall be paid by the appellant to Respondent No. 1 within one month from today. Parties to bear their own costs. Appeal partly allowed.