Failure To Inform Bus Schedule Preponement, Bengaluru District Commission Holds Redbus Liable For Deficiency In Service

The Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-IV, Bengaluru (Karnataka) bench comprising Ramachandra M.S. (President) and Nandini H Kumbhar (Member) held Redbus is liable for deficiency in services for failure to notify the Complainant about a bus departing earlier than scheduled from the bus stop. The bench directed Redbus to refund the booking amount of Rs. 1,023.5/- and pay a compensation of Rs. 5,000/-. Redus was also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- for the litigation costs incurred by the Complainant. Brief Facts: The Complainant booked a ticket for a journey from Udupi to Bengaluru through the online platform Redbus.in. Despite arriving at the designated pickup point well in advance, he discovered through the Redbus Live tracking App that the bus passed the pickup point a full 15 minutes before the scheduled time, without waiting for him. Upon contacting the bus operator, he was informed that the bus was already 10 to 15 kilometres away from the pickup point, and the operator claimed that he made several unsuccessful attempts to contact the Complainant by phone. Despite the Complainant's efforts to address the issue with Redbus, the complaint was closed without any resolution or relief provided. Consequently, the Complainant suffered the loss of an opportunity to secure hostel accommodation. The Complainant made several communications with Redbus for a refund of the ticket amount but didn't receive any satisfactory response from it. Feeling aggrieved, the Complainant approached the IV Addl District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Bengaluru (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against Redbus. Redbus didn't appear before the District Commission for the proceedings. Observations by the District Commission: The District Commission referred to the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, in the case of Kotak Mahendra Old Mutual vs Dr. Nishi Gupta, as reported in CPR 2018(1) and held that the non-filing of a written version in a complaint amounts to an admission of the complaint's allegations. The District Commission held that Redbus didn't appear before it despite being served notice, therefore, the complaint's allegations were to be held as proven facts. The District Commission noted that the tracking information provided indicated that the bus departed from Katapadi station at 9:54 PM, five minutes earlier than the scheduled departure time. Despite the Complainant's punctual arrival at the pickup point, the bus departed early without any communication from Redbus regarding the schedule change. Therefore, the District Commission held Redbus liable for deficiency in services. Consequently, the District Commission directed Redbus to refund the booking amount of Rs. 1,023.5/- to the Complainant along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of booking until the payment of the entire amount. It was also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- to the Complainant for deficiency in service, along with an additional Rs. 5,000/- towards legal costs incurred by the Complainant.Case Title: Rama Rao vs The Authorized Signatory, IBIBO Group Pvt. Ltd. Click HereTo Read/Download Order

Failure To Inform Bus Schedule Preponement, Bengaluru District Commission Holds Redbus Liable For Deficiency In Service

Smita Singh

Tags