BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.            

                                                          Consumer Complaint no. 74 of 2016                                                                           

                                                           Date of Institution         :    11.3.2016

                                                          Date of Decision   :    22.2.2017

Umesh Kumar aged about 43 years son of Shri Balwant, C/o Acculab Dabwali Road, Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa.

                      ……Complainant.

                             Versus.

1. Hitesh Talwar Proprietor Riya Travels, Near Talwar Nursing Home, Hisar Road, Sirsa.

2. Dpauls Tour and Travels, B-50, Shivalik Malvia Nagar, New Delhi through its Managing Director.

                                                                   ...…Opposite parties.

            Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.

Before:        SHRI S.B.LOHIA…………………PRESIDENT

                  SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL ………..……MEMBER.        

Present:       Sh.J.D.Garg,  Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh. S.K. Dhandal, Advocate for opposite party no.1.

       Opposite party no.2 exparte.           

 ORDER

                    It is the case of complainant that complainant and his friends got booked tour of Mauritius and Dubai from opposite party no.1 who is an authorized agent of op no.2. The complainant got booked this tour for him and his wife at the rate of Rs.84,500/- per person for seven nights including air tickets via Dubai and accommodation in Dubai as well as in Mauritius including breakfast and sightseeing. The complainant was assured accommodation with breakfast, desert Safari with dinner, dhow cruise with dinner, half day city tour and airport transfers in Dubai. He was also assured four nights accommodation with breakfast and dinner, east tour with lie Aux cerfs, north tour with Port Louis City, south tour with phoenix town and airport transfers in Mauritius. It is further alleged that complainant was confirmed about booking in Tarisa Resorts (superior room) from 17.1.2016 to 21.1.2016. When they reached Mauritius, they were stunned to see that instead of Tarisa Resorts, the complainant, his wife, his friend Dr. Anjani Aggarwal and his wife were forced to stay in Le Palmsite Resort and Spa which is a hotel of inferior quality instead of Tarisa Resorts and is 8 Kms. away from that Resorts. The rooms given were too small having dormitory type and were not fully furnished. The complainant choose Tarisa Resort because it had Indian restaurant in it and it was a beach resort but hotel Le Palmsite was neither a beach resort nor having Indian restaurant and due to this the complainant and his family who are pure vegetarian found hard to get reasonable food in the hotel. The complainant immediately contacted with the ops but they did not pay any heed to the request of complainant. The complainant and his friends were also charged Rs.760/- (Indian currency) in extra. It is further averred that in this manner, the complainant, his wife and his friends were separated from their group and were forced to stay in inferior hotel instead of the superior hotel as booked and assured by ops. The complainant has suffered great mental tension, hardship and disappointment etc. on account of act and conduct of ops for which he is entitled to compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. Hence, this complaint for a direction to the ops to refund a sum of Rs.1,69,000/- to the complainant on account of tour charges, to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,00,000/- as penalty on account of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.

2.                On notice, opposite party no.1 appeared and filed written statement. It has been averred that op no.1 intimated about the problem of complainant to the op no.2 but the op no.2 denied to pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. The op no.1 has not committed any negligence or unfair trade practice rather the same was committed by op no.2. As per the version of the complainant, he approached the op no.1 and his request has been forwarded to op no.2 but they did not resolve the problem of complainant. As such, dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 has been prayed for.

3.                None appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 and therefore, op no.2 was proceeded against exparte.

4.                The complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1, copy of travel programme Ex.C2, copy of travel programme Ex.C3, copy of receipt Ex.C3, copy of invoice Ex.C5, copy of e-mail Ex.C6, copy of e-mail Ex.C7, copy of electronic ticket receipt Ex.C8. On the other hand, op no.1 tendered his affidavit Ex.R1 and copy of document (containing pages 1 to 3) Ex.R2.

5.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.

6.                The grievance of the complainant is that complainant was assured about confirmation of booking in Tarisa Resorts from 17.1.2016 to 21.1.2016, but when they reached Mauritius, they were stunned that instead of Tarisa Resorts, they were forced to stay in Le Palmsite Resort and Spa which was a hotel of inferior quality instead of Tarisa Resorts and rooms given were too small having dormitory type and complainant was charged Rs.380/- in extra. In the travel programme through Riya Travels (Ex.C2), the name of hotel which was to be provided at Mauritius is mentioned as Tarisa Resort. On return from tour, the complainant sent an e-mail on 26.2.2016 to the authority of Tarisa Resort & Spa (Ex.C6) mentioning worst experience of life and the contents of the said e-mail are as under “We have booked 6 rooms for our family group of 12 peoples in this hotel. On arrival on Airport we were told that in hotel we have only 4 rooms available because they have technical problem in 2 rooms. This news on airport turned our mood off because we planned to enjoy our holidays together. After reaching to hotel Mr. Haroun who is Marketing and quality Manager of hotel Tarisa took us in another room to convince us but he was unable to answer about what is technical problem in rooms that because they were telling lie to us. Actually in greed of money in this peak season they overbooked rooms, they did not want to loose a group of 12 people that’s why they knowingly booked the rooms without availability. After long discussion we were helpless and did not had any other option to shift our two rooms in another hotel. The hotel in which they provided us accommodation was 10 km far from hotel tarisa and rooms given to us were not more than dormitory type.” The complainant has also placed on file copy of e-mail sent to him by Mr. Haroun R, Director of Sales at Tarisa Resort & Spa in response to his e-mail as Ex.C7 and relevant contents of that e-mail are as follows “I felt really sad to read that your stay did not go as per your expectation. As explained to you, we sincerely apologize for that unforeseen situation which was beyond our control to have two rooms which went out of use due to a technical issue. However, you have agreed on the first day of your stay that this unforeseen situation was professionally handled by Tarisa Resort & Spa and the staff. You were taken very good care from the start till the end of your holiday at Tarisa Resort & Spa. The hotel staff and the management team have always been attending to your requests all the time. I do remember that you have enjoyed the most of the advantages and privileges given to you and the whole group. You have been promised to be upgraded to a Sea facing room which was given to you during your stay at Tarisa Resort & Spa. I reiterate that you have not been cheated at all nor we cheat our valued guest.” From the above said e-mail sent by Mr. Haroun R, it is evident that out of booked rooms two rooms went out of use due a technical issue and complainant and his family members were stayed by the said hotel at some other hotel and inconvenience to the complainant was regretted by the said hotel. The providing of another hotel by Tarisa Resort & Spa at Mauritius does not give rise to any cause of action to the complainant against the opposite parties in this Forum and ops cannot be held deficient in service because they were also not in the knowledge at the time of booking that such type of technical problem in the hotel at Mauritius will occur and they duly booked the hotel as per the choice of complainant. In any case, the cause of action if any arose is against the hotel at Mauritius and not against the ops at here especially when one of the opposite parties i.e. op no.2 is doing its business at New Delhi.

7.                Keeping in view our above discussion, the complainant has failed to prove his case against the ops and as such the present complaint is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs.  A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record room. 

Announced in open Forum.                                 President,

Dated:22.2.2017.                  Member.             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                          Redressal Forum, Sirsa.