BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

Date of filing : 17/05/2012

Date of Order : 21/12/2013

Present :-

Shri. A. Rajesh, President.

Shri. Sheen Jose, Member.

C.C. No. 298/2012

Between

And

O R D E R

A. Rajesh, President.

1. Briefly stated, the case of the complainants is as follows :-

The complainants booked a tour package with the opposite party to visit Shimla, Kulu, Manali and Delhi at a cost of Rs. 16,900/- per person. Duration of the tour was for 5 nights and 6 days. As per the tour package, the opposite party offered amenities like pick and drop from Railway station by Innova van, neat and clean 3 star accommodation and 3 tier A/C train journey. In addition to the complainants, 11 other persons including women and children had also availed the same package provided by the opposite party. The opposite party has supplied train tickets from Ernakulam to Delhi in Thatkal category. The opposite party assured that when the tour party arrives at Delhi Railway Station they would be received by a guide by name Karthik. But he was reluctant to help the complainants at Delhi. The complainants along with other passengers managed to travel in a 12 seater Tempo traveller provided by the opposite party. The complainants had to suffer a lot of inconveniences in the vehicle, since 17 member tour party had to travel in a vehicle expected to carry only 12. The opposite parties failed to provide breakfast at Shimla. They had break fast on their own. The return journey to Delhi from Manali via Kulu in the same Tempo traveler was a nightmare for the complainants. During the return journey, the accommodation provided in Delhi was in a third rate hotel. Though the opposite party agreed to provide sight seeing and shopping after the breakfast in Delhi, the opposite party failed to do so. From their hotel in Delhi to the Railway Station, the complainants had to arrange their own means of travel. 3 members in the tour party were in the waiting list for the journey from Delhi to Cochin. The complainants are entitled to get compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- each. This complaint hence.

2. The version of the opposite party is as follows :-

The opposite party conducted a tour to visit Shimla, Kulu, Manali and Delhi and the price of the tour package was Rs. 16,900/- per person. The opposite party provided all the amenities as agreed and offered by them. The opposite party never offered all conveyance by Innova Van. The train tickets were taken under Tatkal category and this fact was informed to the complainants well in advance. The complaints were provided with a driver-cum-guide at the Delhi Railway Station and Mr. Karthik the agent of the opposite party was present in person and he provided the tempo traveler with a driver-cum-guide. Breakfast was provided to the complainants on all days, as assured by the opposite party. Accommodation provided in Delhi was in a reputed hotel. The same Tempo traveler was deputed to the journey of the complainants for their return journey and the journey to railway station. The complainants were provided with train tickets in Kerala Express and the opposite party never offered tickets in Rajadhani Express. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed in limine.

3. The 5^th and 8^th complainants were examined as PW's 1 and 2 respectively. Exts. A1 to A4 series were marked on the side of the complainants. Neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced by the opposite party. Heard the counsel for the parties.

4. The only point that comes up for consideration is whether the complainants are entitled to get a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- each from the opposite party or not?

5. It is not in dispute that the opposite party conducted a tour package for the complainants and 11 other members from Cochin to Delhi and back after visiting Shimla, Kulu and Manali. It is also not in dispute that the complainants paid a sum of Rs. 16,900/- per person to the opposite party towards the price of the tour package. Ext. A2 is the itinerary of the tour package starting from 26-04-2012 to 26-04-2012. Ext. A2 reads as follows :-

“Duration : 5 Nights/6Days

Destination : Himachal

Delhi – Shimla (2N) – Kulu – Manali (2N) – Delhi (1N)

Day 1 : Delhi to Shimla

On arrival pick up from Railway station Delhi. Depart for Shimla. On the way visit Pinjore Garden, Timber Trail. On arrival check in hotel. Dinner at Hotel. O/N/S (Over Night Stay).

Day 2 : Shimla

After breakfast Excursion to Kufri. Kufri is famous for its Himalayan National park, Poney and Yak Ride and one can see the endless Himalayan Panorama from Kufri, after lunch sight seeing of various places in and around. Shimla mosques built in (1830), Vice regal Lodge built in (1885), Christ Church built in (1844), The Gaiety Theatre-the first beauty contest of world was supposed to start (1887). The Grind lays Bank (1912)- the world wide bank started by Robert Melville Grind Lay. The Scandal Point and The famous shopping Plaza of the North The Mall. Dinner at Hotel. O/N/S (over night stay).

Day 3 : Shimla to Manali

After breakfast check out hotel depart for Manali. On the way visit Pandho Dem, Hanogi Mata Temple. On arrival check in hotel. Dinner at Hotel O/N/S.

Day 4 : Slow Point Solang Valley -Manali

After B/F (breakfast) excursion to Solang Valley, Hadimba Temple, Manu temple, Vashisht Bath, Van Vihar, Tibetans Monastery, Club House and evening shopping at the local market Mall Road. Dinner at Hotel. O/N/S.

Day 5 : Manali-Kullu-Delhi

After B/F check out hotel. Depart for Delhi. On the way visit Kullu Vaishno Devi Temple, Kullu shawls weaving Ind. On arrival check in hotel. Evening free for shopping. O/N/S.

Day 6 : Delhi

After B/F Delhi Sight seeing evening drop at Railway station Delhi.

Inclusion

• Daily Breakfast

• Pick & Drop (rail or flight)

• All transfers (Innova)

• All Sightseeing

• Neat & Clean 3* accommodation

  3 tier AC (train)”

6. The complainants highlighted the following short falls on the part of the opposite party while conducting the tour package :

1. The complainants were not provided with a guide at Delhi Railway Station for their further journey.

2. The opposite party provided a 12 seator tempo traveler for the travel of 17 members in the tour party, though the opposite party had agreed to provide Innova van for transportation during their entire tour package.

3. No breakfast was available at Shimla.

4. The accommodation provided in Delhi was in a third rate hotel, they had to arrange their own conveyance to the railway station from the hotel.

5. 3 members in the tour party were in the waiting list for their journey from Delhi to Cochin.

7. The above points are answered as aforesaid and as under :

1. It is pertinent to note that as per Ext. A2, the opposite party had not agreed to provide service of an exclusive guide during the journey. Admittedly, the complainants were provided with a guide-cum-driver from the Railway Station, Delhi and to and fro journey from Delhi to Shimla as stated in the itinerary. In that case, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in not providing an exclusive guide during the journey. So this contention cannot be fully up held.

2. In Ext. A2, it is clearly stated that the participants of the tour package will be provided with an innova car. Instead they were accommodated in a 12 seator tempo traveller. The non-contravention of this aspect shows that the opposite party had miserably failed in keeping their word which according to the Consumer Protection Act squarely covers the ambit of deficiency in service for which the opposite party is answerable. The compensation in this aspect shall be dealt with others as the view arises.

3. It is to be noted that the opposite party failed to produce any evidence either oral or documentary to show that the complainants were provided with breakfast in Shimla. Though they raise such a contention plainly speaking, it is evident that the opposite party had grudged the complainants even their break fast, a grave draw back seriously answerable.

4. Another serious complaint raised by the complainants is that though they were promised accommodation as per Ext. A2 in a 3 star neat and clean accommodation what was provided was a 3^rd rate accommodation. It is noteworthy that the opposite party has not even cared to produce the bill of the same in this case. Here too culpability is answerable by the opposite party.

5. This is only a lettering of a common grievance which has neither been substantiated and not contested by the opposite party probably since so.

    

   8. Though, the complainants produced Ext. A4 series to prove that some of the complainants had to undergo treatment, subsequent to the journey does not hold water, since such a contention does not find a place in the complaint.

    

9. Resultantly, what necessarily called for is pronouncement of compensation. Taking each aspect into consideration, we feel that an amount must be awarded though it must be born in mind that the very purpose of the tour package has been enjoyed by the complainants though with some inconveniences on the part of the opposite party. On a considered thought, we feel that an amount of Rs. 5,000/- each would abate the agony of the complainants. Ordered accordingly.

10. In the result, we partly allow the complaint and direct that the opposite party shall pay Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) each to the complainant towards compensation for the reasons stated above.

The order shall be complied with, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the above amount would carry interest @ 12% p.a. till payment.

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 21^st day of December 2013.

Forwarded/By Order, Sd/- A. Rajesh, President.

Sd/- Sheen Jose, Member.

Senior Superintendent.

A P P E N D I X

Complainant's Exhibits :-

Opposite party's Exhibits :: Nil

=========