Punjab

StateCommission

A/1/2018

Anil Kumar Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

By Post

22 Feb 2018

ORDER

                                                                                       2^Nd ADDITIONAL BENCH

STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No.01 of 2018

                                                          Date of Institution : 01.01.2018

                                                          Order Reserved on : 13.02.2018

                                                          Date of Decision :   22.02.2018

 

Anil Kumar Gupta s/o Sh. Keemat Rai Aggarwal, Resident of H. No.124, Prem Basti, Street No.1, Sangrur.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Appellant/complainant

Versus

1. Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd. Having its head office at DLF Building No.5, Tower-C, DLF Cyber City, Phase-2, Sector 25, Gurgaon-122002 through its Manager.
2. City Tour and Travel, through its owner Bobby, Dhuri Gate Bazar, Sangrur.

                                                                   Respondents/opposite parties      

First Appeal against order dated 14.11.2017 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,   Sangrur.

Quorum:-

          ShriGurcharan Singh Saran, Presiding Judicial Member.

          Shri Rajinder Kumar Goyal, Member

 

Present:-

          For appellant                          :         Sh. Inderjit Singh, Advocate  

 

RAJINDER KUMAR GOYAL MEMBER

ORDER

                   The appellant/complainant (hereinafter referred to as complainant) has filed the present appeal against the order dated  14.11.2017 passed in Consumer Complaint No.316 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sangrur (herein referred as District Forum) vide which the complaint filed by the complainant was dismissed and the parties were left to bear their own costs.

2.                Complaint was filed by the appellant/complainant under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the Respondents/Opposite Parties (herein referred as OPs) on the averments that the complainant booked a tour package vide ID No.IN705B4S4089149 for a sum of Rs.1,52,000/- for three persons and paid Rs.90,000/- through HDFC Bank as OP No.1 had promised that if the payment made through HDFC bank there will be a cash back of Rs.15,000/- which was never paid to the complainant. The complainant had been cheated by Ops by charging Rs.47,000/- in excess as the same package was available in the market for Rs.35,000/- per person whereas the OP No.1 charged Rs.50,700/- per person. OP No.1 charged an amount of Rs.12,00/- being the cost of the sim which was fake. Further on arrival in the hotel the Ops provided room No.419, 438 to him  and his friend at a distance of 20 rooms whereas adjoining rooms were available. Thus alleging deficiency in service the complainant prayed that Ops be directed to refund to  the complainant the excess amount of Rs.47,000/- and further to refund Rs.1200/- and Rs.6000/- so charged in excess and further refund amount of Rs.15,000/- being cash back as promised by OP No.1 along with compensation and litigation expenses.  

3.                Upon notice, OP No.1 appeared and contested the complainant by filing written statement taking preliminary objections that the  complainant booked a tour through OP No.2 to Tashkent in Uzbekistan for the dates 11.06.2017 to 15.06.2017 and the tour package included services for return air ticket by Uzbekistan Airways, four nights accommodation in hotel Le Grand on sharing basis, early check in, buffet breakfast, lunch and dinner, as directed in the itinerary, entrance for all mentioned monuments, shopping tour, tour to Charvak Lake and Chimgan Hills with Chair Lift, Tashkent City Tour and transfers from airport-Hotel-Airport. It was admitted that Ops provided complete details of the package in advance to the complainant. Thus OP has no role in possessing the cash back etc. it was denied that OP charged any amount of Rs.1200/- as alleged by the complainant rather the same was charged by the network operator for providing the sim to the complainant. The other allegations leveled in the complaint  were denied in toto.

4.                Opposite party no.2 was proceeded against an ex-parte.

5.                Before the District Forum the parties led their respective evidence.

6.                Counsel for the complainant has produced
Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OP No.1 has produced Ex.OP1/1 affidavit and Ex.OP1/2 copy of authority letter and closed the evidence. 

7.                After going through the allegations as alleged in the complaint, written version filed by OPs evidence and documents brought on record the complaint filed by the complainant was dismissed as stated above.

8.                Aggrieved with the order passed by the learned District Forum the appellant/complainant has filed the present appeal.

9.                We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/ complainant  and have persued the record carefully.

10.              It was argued by the counsel for the appellant/complainant during admission of appeal that at the time of booking OP No.1 promised that if the payment of Rs.90,000/- is made through HDFC Bank Credit Card then Rs.15,000/- cash back will be given. Accordingly, the appellant made the payment through HDFC Credit Card. The OP refused to give credit of Rs.15,000/-. Further the OP No.1 cheated the complainant by charging Rs.47,000/- excess as the same package was available in the market for Rs.35,000/- per person.  As such there is deficiency in service on the part of Ops and prayed that the appeal may be accepted and the complaint may be allowed.  

11.              There is no evidence on record wherein the OP No.1 had promised to refund the cash back of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant. In case, it was to be paid by HDFC  then it is not a party to the complaint, as such, no order can be passed in favour of complainant about this payment. As agreed between the complainant & OP No.1, the complainant booked the tour for Rs.1,52,000/- for three persons. Payment as agreed was paid. At a later stage, it cannot be said that the tour was available at lesser price and also it is not within the perview of the consumer fora to check the agreed rates between the parties. As such there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops.

12.              Sequel to the above, we find no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed in limine with liberty to  the complainant to file fresh complaint against HDFC Bank for refund of the cash back amount against payment made through HDFC Credit Card.  

 

 

                                                                     (Gurcharan Singh Saran)

                                                                   Presiding Judicial Member

 

 

                                                                  

          February    22,    2018                            (Rajinder Kumar Goyal)

          PK/-                                                               Member