DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC DIVISION, MYSORE vs AZEEZ AHMED

THIS appeal by the KSRTC is directed against the order dated 28.1.1991 passed by the District Forum, Mysore in Complaint No. 239/90-91, on its file.

IT arises in this way : The respondent purchased a ticket from Mysore to Chittur by paying Rs. 70/- at the KSRTC Bus Stand, Mysore from the ticket issuing clerk on 15.7.1990. He ought to have charged only Rs. 63/- to the complainant. After coming to know that a sum of Rs. 7/- has been collected in excess from him, the complainant wrote to the Divisional Controller, Mysore on 20th July, 1990, As he did not get any response to his letter, he filed a complaint before the District Forum, Mysore on 20.7.1990 for return of the said amount and, compensation for mental agony suffered by him. The appellant who was the respondent before the District Forum admitted that the clerk had wrongly collected Rs. 70/- instead of Rs. 63/- from the complainant by oversight due to rush of work on that day and that the said amount had been refunded to the complainant on 18.9.1990 by money order. The complainant gave evidence and produced the zerox copies of the ticket. On the said material the District Forum held that the complainant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 500/- apart from the refund of Rs. 7/- collected in excess from him and directed the appellant to refund Rs, 7/- and pay compensation of Rs. 500/- and costs of Rs. 100/-. Hence, this appeal by the KSRTC.

It is true that the KSRTC ought to have been diligent in replying to the letter of the respondent (complainant) and ought to have refunded the amount of Rs. 7/- collected in excess from the complainant immediately after receiving his letter. But the complainant cannot be said to have suffered mental agony by the delay in refunding Rs. 7/-. Hence, the award of compensation of Rs. 500/- by the District Forum cannot be justified. At best, the complainant is entitled to some interest on Rs. 7/- which was wrongly collected from him by the ticket issuing clerk. The act of the ticket issuing clerk in collecting excess amount also deserves to be condemned.

IT is stated by the Learned Counsel for the appellant that enquiry was also held against the clerk concerned and that he has been warned to be careful in future. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the order of the District Forum awarding compensation of Rs. 500/- to the respondent is set aside and the remaining order of the District Forum is confirmed. Parties to bear their own costs in this appeal. Appeal partly allowed.