L. Manoharan(President):- Second opposite party in OP: 764/98 on the file of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. Thiruvananthapuram is the appellant. The complainant/respondent approached the District Forum with a grievance that he boarded the train. Trivandrum Chennai Mail scheduled start from Trivandrum at 1.30 PM. On the faith of the announcement by the railway that the train would start at the appointed time, while so at 1.35 P.M. another announcement was made that the departure of the Chennai Mail would be delayed by half an hour he remained in the train hoping that the train would start as ar1nounced at 2. PM. the train did not leave the station as announced and at 2.20 PM it was again accounted that the train would start shortly but left only by 2.30 PM. He alleged because of the delay inconvenience was caused him. Then on 12th September 1998 also the train which was scheduled to leave the station on 1.30 PM left the station at 3.35 PM after a delay of 2 hours he boarded the train on that occasion also believing the announcement that the train would leave at the appointed hour but because of the delay his programme collapsed. Therefore he suffered mental agony and in