Kerala

StateCommission

A/261/2023

ASHARAF TRAVEL VISION HOLIDAYS - Complainant(s)

Versus

FAISAL U K - Opp.Party(s)

29 May 2023

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
 
First Appeal No. A/261/2023
( Date of Filing : 27 Apr 2023 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 05/12/2022 in Case No. CC/224/2022 of District Malappuram)
 
1. ASHARAF TRAVEL VISION HOLIDAYS
FIRST FLOOR TAJ BUILDING CENTRE BAZAAR JUNCTION POOKKATTIRI
2. ASHRAF TRAVEL VISION HOLIDAYS
DD MILE STONE ROOM NO 101 SECOND FLOOR KADAVANTRA DT 682020
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. FAISAL U K
UPPUKUZHIYIL HOUSE NEAR CANARA BANK ATM KAVUNGAL BYPASS JUNCTION MALAPPURAM 676505
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SRI.K.SURENDRA MOHAN PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D JUDICIAL MEMBER
  SMT.BEENAKUMARI.A MEMBER
  SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN.K.R MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 29 May 2023
Final Order / Judgement

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL No. 261/2023

JUDGMENT DATED: 29.05.2023

(Against the Order in C.C. 224/2022 of CDRC, Malappuram)

PRESENT:

SRI. AJITH KUMAR D.                                                    : JUDICIAL MEMBER

SMT. BEENA KUMARY. A                                              : MEMBER

SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN K.R.                                        : MEMBER

APPELLANTS:

 

  1. Ashraf, Travel Vision Holidays, First Floor, Taj Building Centre, Bazaar Junction, Pookkattiri, Malappuram-676 552.

 

  1. Ashraf, Travel Vision Holidays, D.D. Mile Stone, Room No. 101, 2nd Floor, Kadavanthra Junction, Cochin, Ernakulam-682 020.

 

                    (By Advs. Abdul Shukkur Arakkal & Manu Mohan Charummood)

 

                                                Vs.

RESPONDENT:

 

Faisal U.K., Uppukuzhiyil House, Near Canara Bank ATM., Kavungal, Bypass Junction, Malappuram District - 676 505.

 

JUDGMENT

SRI. RADHAKRISHNAN K R : MEMBER

 

            The opposite parties in C.C. No. 224/2022 of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Malappuram (in short the District Commission) are in appeal.  The appellants are tour operators.  The complaint was filed by the respondent herein alleging that he had been part of a conducted tour that was organized by the appellants.  According to the respondent/complainant, a lot of deficiencies had occurred in the service of the appellants during the tour.  As a result, it is stated that the complainant, his wife and children suffered from various discomforts like diarrhea, vomiting etc.  apart from other health problems.  He therefore claimed compensation from the appellants for the deficiency in service. 

2.  Though notice had been issued to the appellants, they did not turn up.  Therefore, they were set ex-parte and the complaint has been allowed by the District Commission placing reliance on the unchallenged evidence available in this case.  

3.  According to the appellants, they had not been served with notice in this case. Hence they could not appear before the District Commission and file their version and produce evidence. It is stated that their office had been closed during the Covid pandemic period and had not been functioning thereafter.  The counsel for the appellants have a plea regarding their financial problems also.

4.  Heard.  The District Commission has stated in paragraph 7 of the order appealed against that though notice had been served on the opposite parties they did not turn up.  For the said reason, they were set ex-parte.  Absolutely, no evidence has been produced by the opposite parties to show that the said observation of the District Commission is erroneous in any manner.  We notice that, this is a case in which no version has been filed by the appellants, though they had received notice from the District Commission.  Therefore, in view of the dictum laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (2020)5 SCC 757, it is not possible for them to file a written version now.  For the above reason, there is no point in admitting this appeal or calling for the Lower Court Records. This appeal is therefore dismissed.

The amount of statutory deposit made by the appellants shall be refunded to them, on proper acknowledgment. 

 

                            

AJITH KUMAR D.  : JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

 

 BEENA KUMARY. A        : MEMBER

 

   

                                                                        RADHAKRISHNAN K.R.  : MEMBER

jb

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SRI.K.SURENDRA MOHAN]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SRI.AJITH KUMAR.D]
JUDICIAL MEMBER
 
 
[ SMT.BEENAKUMARI.A]
MEMBER
 
 
[ SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN.K.R]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.