DELHI AND DISTRICT CRICKET ASSOCIATION vs HARSIMRON SINGH SANDHU

THE present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), is directed against order dated 1.2.2003, passed by District Forum (Central), Maharana Pratap Bus Terminal, Kashmere Gate, Delhi, in Complaint Case No. 273/2002 entitled Shri Harsimron Singh Sandhu & Anr. v. M/s. Delhi and District Cricket Association, Ferozshah Kotla Stadium, New Delhi.

THE facts, relevant for the disposal of the above mentioned appeal, briefly stated are that the respondents had filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Act before the District Forum averring therein that the complainants had purchased four tickets each of Rs. 2,000/-, through Canara Bank, for witnessing the ''One Day Cricket International Match'' which was to be played between India and England at Ferozshah Kotla Stadium, New Delhi on 31.1.2002. It was stated that on the appointed day the complainants along with other valid ticket holders reached Firozshah Kotla Stadium at about 9.00 a.m. and by 9.15 a.m. they were at the entrance gate of the stadium. It was stated that to their utter astonishment, they were told that all the seats in the stadium were full and no further entry in the stadium would be allowed. It was stated that the complainants and the other co-ticket holders waited for two hours to gain entry in the stadium but despite the fact that the complainants showed their tickets, they were not allowed entry in the stadium. A report about the above incident was lodged by the complainants with the police authorities also. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the appellant, it was prayed by the complainants, in the complaint filed by them that the appellant be directed to refund a sum of Rs. 8,000/- being the price of four entry tickets, purchased by them which could not be utilized. THE respondents had also claimed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as damages and a sum of Rs. 12,700/- @ 18% p.a. from 1.2.2002 till the date of payment. The claim of the respondents in the District Forum was resisted by the appellant. In the reply/written version filed on behalf of the appellant, it was stated that the game of cricket in this country has gained wide popularity due to which huge crowd of enthusiastic spectators gather around cricket ground/stadium which leads to law and order situation which is to be handled by the local police. It was stated that failure to have entry into the stadium by an authorised ticket holder was mainly attributable to the failure on the part of local authorities who were manning the entry gate and did not under the purview of the appellant. It was further stated that it was open to the valid ticket holders who could not get entry into the stadium to establish communication through telephone/mobile phone with the staff of the appellant. It was stated that the appellant have a good track record in the management of cricket events. It was prayed in the reply/written version that the complaint, filed by the complainants, had no merits and deserved to be dismissed.

The learned District Forum, vide impugned order, has held that there has been gross deficiency of service on the part of the appellant and on the basis of the above findings, the learned District Forum has passed the order, being impugned in the present proceedings.

WE have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant at length on the question of admission of the present appeal and have also carefully gone through the documents/material on record. On the basis of documents/material on record, it is not in dispute that the complainants had purchased the tickets in question for witnessing the ''One Day Cricket International Match'' between India and England, scheduled to be held at Ferozshah Kotla Stadium, New Delhi on 31.1.2002. It is also not in dispute that though the complainants and the persons accompanying them were holding valid tickets, each costing Rs. 2,000/-, for witnessing the event but they could not gain entry in the stadium and were told that all the seats in the stadium were full. The learned Counsel for the appellant during the course of arguments made a vain attempt by saying that the entry gates in the stadium were being manned by the local police authorities and the appellant had no control over the same and if the respondents could not gain entry, the same was not due to any deficiency or fault on the part of the appellant but the same was attributable to the failure on the part of local police authorities in discharging their duties. In our opinion, the plea being advanced by the learned Counsel for the appellant is devoid of merit because the complainants, who had purchased the tickets, had privity of contract with the appellant and not with the local police. The arrangement made with the local police was between the appellant and the local police and the respondents were not concerned with the same. In our opinion, in the given facts, no fault can be found with the findings of the learned District Forum. The order, which is well reasoned one, suffers from no infirmity so as to call for any interference by this Commission in exercise of its appellate powers. The present appeal, filed by the appellant, is, therefore, devoid of substance. The same merits dismissal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed in limine with no order as to costs. The above mentioned appeal, filed by the appellant, stands disposed of in above terms. Appeal dismissed in limine.