Karnataka

Belgaum

CC/291/2015

Prabhavati P Mathapathi - Complainant(s)

Versus

K S Jayalingappa. President Of Shreemad Jagadguru Panchacharya Dharmik Yatra Samiti - Opp.Party(s)

P S kulkarni

06 Nov 2015

ORDER

(Order dictated by Smt. Sunita, Member)

ORDER

          The complainant has filed the complaint u/s. 12 of the C.P. Act against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service of Tour program to holly place.

          2) In-spite service of notice, both O.Ps. have remained absent. Hence placed ex-parte.

          3) In support of the claim made in the complaint, the complainant has filed her affidavit and produced certain documents. We have heard the arguments and perused the records.

          4) Now the point for our consideration is that whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and entitled to the reliefs sought?

          5) Our finding on the point is partly in affirmative for the following reasons.

REASONS

          6) On perusal contents of the complaint and affidavit filed by the complainant, the complainant intend to travel to holy place and the Opponents came to contact with complainant and explained the tour program to the holy place Kashi. The O.Ps. organized the Kashi tour successfully. The complainant further contended that O.Ps.  organized another tour from Bangalore to Rameshwar on 28/3/2015. The cost of the trip was Rs.3,000/- for two days which included breakfast and other facilities. After looking the tour program the complainant paid an amount of Rs.3,000/- from her Saving Account in the state bank of Mysore, Belgaum having account No. 64126217450 and the amount transferred through R.T.G.S. from her account to the account of O.P.No.2 bearing account No. 10448511161-IFSE Code – 000381 state bank of India, Bangalore on 18/3/2015. The complainant further submits that the O.Ps. accepted the amount and told to the complainant come to Bangalore on 28/3/2015 and the complaint after reaching Bangalore contacted the opponents. The complainant leaving from Belgaum on 27/3/2015 and reached Bangalore on 28/3/2015 to go to Rameshwar Tour and contacted O.Ps. through phone but the O.Ps. have not responded to the complainant. The complainant submits that she had tried continuously to contact the O.Ps. but they did not the respond. Therefore the complainant before returning to Belgaum once again in the evening contacted the O.Ps. and O.Ps. received the phone and reveals that the bus has already left to Rameshwar.

          7) The complainant submits that the complainant called to the opponents and demanded to pay the amount of Rs.3,000/- (bus charge. The O.Ps. agreed to pay the amount so complainant return to Belagavi. The complainant further submits that after few days, the complainant called the opponents to pay the amount but the O.Ps. postponed the payment on one or the other reasons.  The complainant issued a legal notice to opponents to pay the amount but the opponent not replied the notice. The complainant submits that it is clear that the opponents failed to give the proper service and committed deficiency in service towards the complainant.

          8) The O.Ps. on the other hand have not appear before the forum and the notice is issued were returned with an endorsement from the postal department “as not claimed”. Hence both O.Ps. were called out and placed ex-parte. The complainant to prove contents of his complaint has produced several documents along with the ticket booked for travelling from Belagavi to Bengalore. The complainant has produced two acknowledgements and a copy of notice sent to O.Ps. prior to filing of the complainant before the forum. The complainant also produced the Xerox copy of S.B. Pass book wherein the complainant argued that she has marked the date and amount transferred to O.Ps. through NEFT.

          9) The O.Ps. have have not replied to the notice sent on 29/4/2015 prior to filing this complaint and also that the O.Ps. have not even received the notices of forum. The complainant has produced the booklet printed by “Manupatra” (internet copy) wherein we can read that the roll of e-commerce and its important and also the complainant argued in the said booklet it has been given in details regards to determining jurisdiction over e-commerce disputes in India. The complainant argued on the point of jurisdiction and submitted that though the O.ps. are running the business at Bangalore this forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, as the complainant has booked the Yatra from Belagavi and also submitted that amount of Rs.3,000/- has debited by NEFT on 18/3/2015 from her S.B. Account which is in Belagavi. Hence the complainant argued that the cause of action partly arose at Belagavi. Therefore this forum has jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.

          10)    After going through this complaint affidavit and documents produced we are of opinion that this forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and take cognizance. Hence the complaint has proved the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of opponents. Hence following order;

ORDER

          The complaint is partly allowed.

          The O.Ps. are directed to pay amount of Rs.3,000/- to the complainant with interest at the rate of 8% P.A. from 18/3/2015 till realization of entire amount. If O.Ps. failed to pay the amount within stipulated time to the complainant, the amount shall carry future interest at the rate of 4% P.A. in addition to above mentioned interest.

          Further the O.Ps. shall pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant towards mental agony etc.,

          And also the O.Ps. are hereby directed to pay cost of Rs.2,000/- towards proceedings.

          Above order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of the order.

 (Order dictated, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on: 6^th day of November 2015)

                  Member                      Member            President.

gm*