Southern Railway to Pay ₹10,000 Over Vande Bharat Refund Dispute
Kollam Consumer Commission orders Southern Railway to pay ₹10,000 compensation to a passenger over a Vande Bharat Express refund dispute.
The Kollam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Kerala has issued a significant order, directing Southern Railway to pay ₹10,000 in compensation to a passenger. The ruling follows a legal battle regarding a refund dispute involving a Vande Bharat Express journey.
The Tatkal Booking Conflict
The dispute began when a passenger, Bijoy Thompson, booked three Tatkal tickets for travel from Tirur to Kollam in February 2025. However, the family discovered that only one ticket was confirmed, while the remaining two stayed on the waitlist. Faced with an incomplete booking, the family decided to cancel the entire trip.
Mr. Thompson had filed for a refund of ₹3,593.60 prior to the train's scheduled departure. However, the railway administration initially rejected the claim, alleging that two of the passengers listed in the booking had actually boarded and traveled on the train.
Railway Fails to Provide Evidence
During the legal proceedings, the commission—led by President S.K. Sreela and member Stanly Harold—scrutinized the railway's refusal. The tribunal determined that Southern Railway failed to provide any official travel records or concrete evidence to substantiate their claim that the passengers had indeed boarded the train.
While the passenger eventually received a partial refund of ₹3,375 on June 1, 2025, the commission ruled that the initial refusal to process the refund constituted a clear deficiency in service.
Compensation for Mental Agony
The tribunal has ordered Southern Railway to pay the following amounts to the complainant:
- ₹5,000 as compensation for mental agony and hardship.
- ₹5,000 to cover litigation costs.
These payments must be completed within 45 days of the order, which was officially issued on October 31, 2026.
IRCTC Cleared of Wrongdoing
In its ruling, the commission found no independent deficiency on the part of IRCTC. The agency was noted to have acted appropriately as an intermediary by forwarding the passenger's grievance to the railway administration for resolution.