Woman misses hospital visit as KSRTC bus departs before time, gets Rs 35,000 compensation

4 min readNew DelhiJun 9, 2026 05:30 PM IST

The consumer forum found KSRTC deficient in service. (Image generated using AI)

The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Pathanamthitta, has directed the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) to pay Rs 25,000 as compensation and Rs 10,000 as costs to a woman who missed a reserved bus after it allegedly passed her boarding point before the scheduled departure time, causing her to miss a hospital appointment.

The order passed by a bench comprising president George Baby and member Nishad Thankappan noted that the departure of a bus before the scheduled time, causing a reserved passenger to miss the service, is a clear case of deficiency in service.

“As per consumer protection act, the departure of a bus before the scheduled time, causing a reserved passenger to miss the service, is a clear case of deficiency in service,” the bench noted in its order dated May 29.

Bus missed

According to the complaint, the complainant had booked a reserved seat on a KSRTC super fast bus travelling from Kattakada to an Ernakulam hospital on August 24, 2024.

The bus was scheduled to depart from Thiruvalla at 8 am. She had booked the ticket to attend a medical consultation at the hospital at 12.30 pm, for which she had already paid a consultation fee of Rs 500.

The complainant stated that she reached the designated bus stop at 7.30 am and waited until 8.10 am.

When the bus did not arrive, she contacted the crew, who allegedly informed her that the bus had already crossed Thiruvalla and reached Kottayam. She was allegedly told by the bus crew to “board any other bus.”

The complainant pleaded that the incident forced her to cancel the hospital visit, resulting in the loss of the consultation fee and requiring her to take leave on another day for the appointment, causing further financial loss and inconvenience.

What KSRTC said?

KSRTC, while contesting the complaint, argued that the conductor who operated the service was a necessary party to the proceedings and had not been impleaded.

It maintained that the corporation had arranged the service and provided the conductor with the reservation chart containing the complainant’s details.

The allegations of the complainant that she was waiting at the Thiruvalla bus station at the scheduled pickup time and that, upon contacting the crew on the provided phone number, she was informed that the bus had already passed the station, were denied.

However, it acknowledged that there may have been a lapse on the part of the conductor.

It was submitted that the complainant did not allege any deficiency, imperfection, or shortcoming in the quality or nature of service rendered by the corporation to the complainant as a consumer. Therefore, it was urged that it had no obligation to pay any compensation to the complainant.

‘Deficiency in service’

The consumer commission observed that the failure of the crew to report the bus at the Thiruvalla depot was a breach of standard operating procedure and was an ‘imperfection’ in service.

“The opposite party published a schedule and sold a ticket promising the complainant 8:00 AM departure, but failed to provide the service at that time. This is a false representation. Buses shall not depart from intermediate points before the scheduled time,” the commission noted.

The commission observed that the complainant, who was unwell, had to take leave on a later date to visit the hospital after missing the scheduled bus, resulting in a loss of wages.

Referring to the Consumer Protection Act, it noted that “deficiency” includes any fault, imperfection, shortcoming, or inadequacy in the quality, nature, or manner of performance of a service that is required to be maintained under law.

Story continues below this ad

“After appreciating the entire evidence placed on record deficiency in service is established in this case,” it said.

Allowing the complaint, the commission directed KSRTC to refund the bus fare of Rs 146 with 9 per cent annual interest from the date of filing of the complaint. It also ordered the corporation to pay Rs 25,000 as compensation and Rs 10,000 as costs.

Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, where he specializes in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish provides authoritative coverage and nuanced analysis of court developments and landmark judicial decisions for a national audience.

Expertise

Legal Core Competency: Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. This academic foundation allows him to move beyond surface-level reporting, offering readers a deep-dive into the technicalities of statutes, case law, and legal precedents.

Specialized Legal Reporting: His work at The Indian Express focuses on translating the often-dense proceedings of India's top courts into clear, actionable news. His expertise includes:

Judicial Analysis: Breaking down complex orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts.

Legal Developments: Monitoring legislative changes and their practical implications for the public and the legal fraternity.

Industry Experience: With over 5 years in the field, Ashish has contributed to several niche legal and professional platforms, honing his ability to communicate complex information. His previous experience includes:

Lawsikho: Gaining insights into legal education and practical law.

Verdictum: Focusing on high-quality legal news and court updates.

Enterslice: Working at the intersection of legal, financial, and advisory services. ... Read More

Tags:

consumer court