Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/63/2017

Satish Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Five Star Travel & Money - Opp.Party(s)

Shubhankar Baweja

29 Dec 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/63/2017
Date  of  Institution	:	23/01/2017
Date   of   Decision	:	29/12/2017

 

 

 

 

 

Satish Kumar S/o Late Sh. Ashok Kumar, R/o D-76, CSIO, Sector 30-C, Chandigarh.

……… Complainant

 

Versus

 

Five Star Travel & Money, through its owner Nitish Bansal office at Shop No.3, Sector 30-C, Chandigarh.

 

……. Opposite Party

 

BEFORE:   SH. SURESH KUMAR SARDANA     PRESIDING MEMBER

          SH. RAVINDER SINGH           MEMBER

 

For Complainant	:	Sh. Shubhankar Baweja, Advocate.
For Opposite Party	:	Sh. R.G.S. Saini, Advocate.

 

PER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

          Sh. Satish Kumar (hereinafter called the Complainant) has filed this Consumer Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against Five Star Travel & Money (hereinafter called the Opposite Party), alleging that he approached the Opposite Party to book three tickets from New Delhi to Toronto for himself, his wife and his daughter for 30.08.2016. On being enquired about the cancellation charges, the Opposite Party told the Complainant that 120 Euro shall be deducted on cancellation. Accordingly, the Complainant paid a total amount of Rs.1,04,000/- partly in cash and partly by way online bank transaction, whereafter which three economy tickets were booked by Opposite Party. Somehow the plans of Complainant changed and he approached Opposite Party for the cancellation of tickets and refund of the amount after necessary deductions. However, instead of deducting 120 Euro, on cancellation, the Opposite Party deducted 190 Euro per ticket, which the Complainant had to accept under compelling circumstances. Thereafter, the Complainant wrote a number of e-mails to Opposite Party for refunding the excess amount, but when nothing positive came out, he got served a legal notice dated 06.09.2016 upon the Opposite Party, which also did not fructify. With the cup of woes brimming, the Complainant has filed the instant consumer complaint, alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party.

 

2.      Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Party seeking its version of the case.

 

3.      Opposite Party in its reply, while admitting the factual matrix of the case, has pleaded that the cancellation charges of tickets of Air Canada is 190 Euros per ticket and not 120 Euros as alleged by the Complainant. It has been asserted that the answering Opposite Party had already refunded the entire amount which was received by it from Air Canada and had not taken even a single penny therefrom. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, Opposite Party has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

4.      The complainant has filed a replication, wherein he has reiterated all the averments, contained in the complaint, and repudiated those, contained in the written version of Opposite Party.

 

5.      Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record in support of their contentions.

 

6.      We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

 

7.      The main grievance of the Complainant is that the refund made by the Opposite Party on cancellation of the tickets booked by him from Delhi to Toronto was not made as per the terms & conditions of the cancellation. It has been alleged that the Opposite Party charged excessive cancellation charges i.e. in place of 120 EURO per ticket, 190 EURO per ticket were charged. In support of his contention, the Complainant has placed reliance on Annexure C-1. We have carefully perused the said Annexure C-1, which makes it emphatically clear that the cancellation charges will be 120 EURO per ticket. The Opposite Party has miserably failed to adduce any concrete documentary evidence to contradict that the cancellation charges will be 190 EURO per ticket. Hence, we are of the concerted view that charging excess 70 EURO per ticket towards cancellation tantamounts to deficiency in service and its indulgence into unfair trade practice. 

 

8.      In view of the foresaid discussions, we are of the concerted view that the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Party, and the same is allowed, qua it. The Opposite Party is directed as under:-

 

[a]  To refund the excess cancellation charges i.e. 70 EURO per ticket charged from the Complainant (in INR), to the Complainant  along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of cancellation, till realization

 

[b]  To pay Rs.20,000/-on account of deficiency in service and causing mental and physical harassment to the Complainant; 

 

[c] To pay Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation;

 

 

9.      The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by the Opposite Party; thereafter, it shall be liable for an interest @12% per annum on the amount mentioned in sub-para [a] above from the date of cancellation, till it is paid. The compensation amount as per sub-para [b] above, shall carry interest @12% per annum from the date of institution of this complaint, till it is paid, apart from cost of litigation as in sub-para [c]. 

 

10.      Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

29^th Dec., 2017                                              Sd/-        

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

                                             Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

       MEMBER

 “Dutt”