An Indian man has won a case related to an overpriced railway ticket after almost 22 years.
Tungnath Chaturvedi, a lawyer, was charged Rs20 extra for two tickets he bought in 1999, the BBC reported on Thursday.
The incident occurred at Mathura cantonment railway station in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh.
A consumer court last week ruled in favour of Chaturvedi and asked the railway authorities to refund the amount with interest.
"I have attended more than 100 hearings in connection with this case," Chaturvedi, 66, told the BBC, adding: "But you cannot put a price on the energy and time I have lost fighting this case."
Chaturvedi, who lives in Uttar Pradesh, was travelling from Mathura to Moradabad when a ticket-booking clerk overcharged him for the two tickets.
The tickets cost Rs35 each, but when he gave the clerk Rs100, he only returned Rs10, charging Rs90 for the tickets instead of Rs70.
Chaturvedi did not get any refund at the time despite telling the clerk.
So he decided to file a case against North East Railway (Gorakhpur) — a section of the Indian Railway — and the booking clerk in a consumer court in Mathura.
He said it had taken him years because of the slow pace at which the judiciary worked in India.
"The railway also tried to dismiss the case, saying complaints against the railway should be addressed to a railway tribunal and not a consumer court," said Chaturvedi. A railway claims tribunal is a quasi-judicial body set up to address claims related to train travel in India.
"But we used a 2021 Supreme Court ruling to prove that the matter could be heard in a consumer court," Chaturvedi said. At other times, hearings would get delayed because judges were on vacation or condolence leave, he added.
After the long fight, the judge ordered the railway authorities to pay him Rs15,000. The court also directed Indian Railway to refund him the Rs20 at 12% interest per year, from 1999 to 2022.
The court also ordered that if the amount was not paid in the specified time of 30 days, the interest rate would be revised to 15%.
Chaturvedi said the compensation he would get was paltry and it did not make up for the mental anguish the case had caused him. His family tried to dissuade him several times from pursuing the case, calling it a waste of time, but he kept going.
"It is not the money that matters. This was always about a fight for justice and a fight against corruption, so it was worth it," he said. "Also, since I am an advocate myself, I did not have to pay money to a lawyer or bear the cost of travelling to the court. That can get quite expensive."
He said he believed that no matter what a person's official designation was, they "cannot get away with wrongdoings if people are prepared to question them about it".
He said his case would serve as an inspiration to others that "one does not need to give up even when the fight looks tough".
