Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/319/2015

Shri. Parveen Kumar Khindria - Complainant(s)

Versus

Global Trip Advisor - Opp.Party(s)

Vikas Jain

24 Nov 2015

ORDER

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

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

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/319/2015
Date  of  Institution	:	26/05/2015
Date   of   Decision	:	24/11/2015

 

 

 

 

 

[1]  Parveen Kumar Khindria son of Late Sh. O.N. Khindria;

 

[2]  Kiran Khindria wife of Sh. Parveen Kumar Khindria;

 

Both residents of House NO. 1220, Sector 21-B, Chandigarh.

….Complainants

 

Vs.

 

[1]  Global Trip Advisor, through its CEO/MD, 10^th Floor, Tower M, Unitech Cyber Park, Sector 92, Gurgaon -122002.

 

2^nd Address:-  K-630, DLF Shopping Mall, Nirman Marg, DLF Phase-I, Gurgaon (Haryana).

 

3^rd Address:-  Vatika Atrum, 3^rd Floor, Block-B, Sector 53, Gurgaon – 122002.

 

4^th Address:-  Millennium City, Gurgaon.

 

[2]  Sunil Gupta, Travel Consultant, Domestic Holidays, Global Trip Advisor, 10^th Floor, Tower M, Unitech Cyber Park, Sector 92, Gurgaon (Haryana)-122002. (Deleted vide order dated 23.09.2015).

 

[3]  Aditya Patel, Travel Consultant, Domestic Holidays, Global Trip Advisor, 10^th Floor, Tower M, Unitech Cyber Park, Sector 92, Gurgaon (Haryana)-122002. (Deleted vide order dated 23.09.2015)

 

…… Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:   MRS. SURJEET KAUR            PRESIDING MEMBER

          SH. SURESH KUMAR SARDANA     MEMBER

 

For Complainants	:	Sh. Devanshu Aggarwal, Advocate.
For OP No.1	:	Ex-parte.
For OP Nos.2 & 3	:	Deleted

 

PER SURJEET KAUR, PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

                Mr.Parveen Kumar Khindria & Anr. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Complainants’ for the sake of brevity) has filed this Consumer Complaint against M/s Global Trip Advisor & Others (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Opposite Parties’ for the sake of brevity), alleging that enticed by the various tour packages, offered by the Opposite Party No.1, they (Complainants) booked 3 Nights & 4 Days Tour Package for Goa, commencing from 26.01.2015 to 29.01.2015, to celebrate Silver Jubilee of their marriage, falling on 27.01.2015, and for the said purpose, they had already booked their Air Tickets (Annexure C-1 colly). It has been averred that the Opposite Party No.1 also made confirmed hotel booking for them in Hotel Double Tree by Hilton, Goa, after receiving the total package consideration of Rs.8,999/-(Annexure C-2). While confirming the hotel reservation, the Opposite Party No.1 informed them that details of the representative of the Company who would meet them at the airport on 26.01.2015 on arrival and transport them to the hotel and arrange for the local tours & sight-seeing etc. would be furnished in about a week in advance. On getting no such detail, the Complainants vide e-mail dated 20.1.2015, followed by reminder dated 21.01.2015 requested the Opposite Party No.1 to furnish the same. In response whereof, Opposite Party No.1 vide e-mail dated 22.01.2015 informed the Complainants that there was some service tax issue with the said hotel and advised them to either wait till further communication or to seek refund of the amount paid. All this left, the Complainants in a state of utter shock and all the plans for celebrating Silver Jubilee of their marriage in Goa scuttled due to the aforesaid deficiency in service and malpractice on the part of the Opposite Parties. It has been further averred that since the time was running out, the Complainants vide e-mail dated 24.1.2015 requested the Opposite Party No.1 to fulfill its obligation and commitments under the package or to provide alternative accommodation as per note appended to the conditions of the package. However, when the Opposite Party No.1 did not bother to respond, the Complainants furnished their Bank particulars to Opposite Party No.1 for facilitating the bank transfer of refund amount of Rs.9,000/-. It has been alleged that the Opposite Party No.1 had failed to discharge its legal obligation even in that regard and did not refund the amount paid by the Complainants. The copies of e-mails with regard to the entire communications with the Opposite Parties with effect from 27.12.2014 onwards are annexed as Annexure C-3 (colly) with the Complaint. Since no response came forth from the Opposite Party No.1 and the Complainants had no time to wait, they made their own arrangements and booked Hotel La-Sunila, Goa, for 3 nights, for which they paid Rs.12,000/- (Rs.4,000/- per night) vide bill Annexure C-4. Further, the Complainants had to make their own transport (Taxi) arrangement form Airport to Hotel for which they paid Rs.1100/- on 26.01.2015 and Rs.1250/- for Taxi from Hotel to Airport on 29.01.2015. Besides this, the Complainants had to run around for lunch and dinner for three days (as Hotel La-Sunila where they stayed only provided complimentary breakfast only) and made payments from their own pockets bearing additional costs of about Rs.7500/-, including about Rs.6500/- paid for local transportation for sight-seeing. Aggrieved from in action of the Opposite Parties, the Complainants got served a legal notice dated 17.02.2015 (Annexure C-5) upon the Opposite Parties, but the same failed to elicit the productive results. It has been stated that the aforesaid acts of the Opposite Parties, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. When the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the Act only), was filed before this Forum, seeking various reliefs.

 

2.      Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties, seeking their version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party No.1 despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte on 10.07.2015.

 

3.      In view of the endorsement made by the learned Counsel for the Complainants, on the Complaint itself, giving up Opposite Parties No.2 & 3, the names of Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 were ordered to be deleted from the array of Opposite Parties, vide order dated 23.09.2015.

 

4.      Complainants led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5.      We have heard the learned Counsel for the Complainants and have perused the record with utmost care and circumspection.

 

6.      It is evident from Annexure C-2 the Bank Statement of the account of the Complainant No.1 that he paid Rs.1,000/- on 30.12.2014, and subsequent to that, further an amount of Rs.8,000/- was again transferred in favour of Opposite Party No.1, on 05.01.2015, for getting the services of Opposite Party No.1 for booking of 3 Nights and 04 Days tour package for Goa, to celebrate the Silver Jubilee of their marriage.

 

7.      The main grouse of the Complainants is that the Opposite Party No.1 even after receiving the package consideration of Rs.8,999/- (Annexure C-2) and confirming hotel booking for the Complainants did not respond further to facilitate the Complainants for the same due to which they had to make their own arrangements by spending extra amount.  

 

8.      Annexure C-3 [colly] are the various e-mail communications between the Complainant No.1 and Opposite Party No.1 wherein time and again Opposite Party No.1 promised to fulfill its commitments towards the Complainants. But, that was a mere futile exercise, as ultimately, the Complainants could not get the bookings done on behalf of Opposite Party No.1. There are other e-mails annexed at Pg. No.74 to 79 of the paper book regarding the query of the Complainant No.1 for the hotel booking at Goa. After getting fed-up of writing again and again to the Opposite Party No.1, the Complainants asked for the refund, but till date the Opposite Party No.1 has not refunded the amount despite its own consent for the refund vide e-mail dated 22.01.2015 at Pg. No.77 of the paper book. The amount paid by the Complainant was not refunded even after getting the accounts details of the Complainant No.1, which are available at Pg. No. 88 of the paper book. Even the legal notice (Annexure C-5) was never responded by the Opposite Party No.1 at any point of time.   

 

9.      The Opposite Party No.1 did not appear to contest the claim of the complainants and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the Opposite Party No.1 draws an adverse inference against it. The non-appearance of the Opposite Party No.1 shows that it has nothing to say in its defence against the allegations made by the complainants. Therefore, the assertions of the complainants go unrebutted & uncontroverted.

 

10.      In our opinion, due to the irresponsible attitude of the Opposite Party No.1 in not replying to the e-mails as also the legal notice (Annexure C-5), the Complainants had suffered a lot. We feel that it was the bounden duty of the Opposite Party No.1 to provide the committed services to the Complainants, which they failed to provide despite accepting the full package consideration, which makes a clear pointer towards deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party No.1, thereby causing immense mental and physical harassment to the Complainants.

 

11.      In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the Opposite Party No.1 is found deficient in giving proper service to the complainants and having indulged in unfair trade practice. Hence, the present complaint of the Complainants deserves to succeed against the Opposite Party No.1, and the same is allowed, qua it. The Opposite Party No.1 is, directed  to:-

[a]    To refund to Rs.9,000/- to the Complainants;

 

[b]    To pay Rs.10,000/- each to the Complainants on account of deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and causing mental agony and harassment;

 

[c]    To pay Rs.7,000/- as cost of litigation;

 

 

 

12.     The above said order shall be complied within 30 days of its receipt by the Opposite Party No.1; thereafter, it shall be liable for an interest @12% per annum on the amounts mentioned in sub-para [a] & [b] above from the date of institution of this complaint, till it is paid, apart from cost of litigation as mentioned in sub-para [c] above.  

 

13.      The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

24^th November, 2015                           

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER