D.o.F: 01/12/09

D.o.O:31/05/2010

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                                CC.262/09

                        Dated this, the 31^st    day of May 2010.

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                            : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                                : MEMBER

SMT.P.P.SYAMALADEVI                        : MEMBER 

Smt.Lakshmi.U,

Satabhisha,Mubarak Road,                                 : Complainant

Vidyanagar,Kasaragod

(Adv.Shrikanta Shetty.K,Kasaragod)

Managing Director,

Vivekananda Travels(P)Ltd,

17/483 B, Ist floor,Sreekandeshwara Complex,  : Opposite party

S.K.Temple Road,Calicut.

  (Exparte)                                                

                                                        ORDER

SMT.P.RAMADEVI            : MEMBER

    The facts of the case in brief are as follows:

   That the opposite party is a travel agency conducting Tour programmes, they published an advertisement in the Malayalam dailies regarding a Malaysia - Singapore tour.  According to the complainant , she contacted the opposite party and paid Rs.30, 000/- on 4/3/09 to participate in tour and handed over the copy of her passport to  opposite party.  The opposite party sent a detailed tour chart to the complainant in the month of April 2009.  As per the chart the tour is for 8 days which would start on 26/4/09 and  ending on 3/5/09.  The opposite party asked the complainant to reach Thiruvananthapuram Airport at 6.45 a.m on 26/4/09.  The complainant reached Thiruvananthapuram  on 25/4/09.  She stayed in a hotel but in the late evening the opposite party telephoned to her and told that the tour is postponed due to some technical reason.  After that she contacted the opposite party,  they told that the tour will be conducted only in the month of June 2009 and asked her to contact their Kasaragod office.  When she contacted the Kasaragod office they issued a receipt dtd.5/6/09 which shows that the tour charge is Rs.40, 000/- and issued the receipt to the complainant saying Rs.10, 000/- as less and also told to her that the tour will be started in the month of June 2009.  Thereafter no response on the part of the opposite party regarding the tour.  The complainant telephoned several times to the opposite party but there was no response.  Lastly, she   went to the office of the opposite party and demanded the amount.  Thereafter the opposite party had sent a cheque for Rs.30, 000/- drawn infavour of the complainant. But when the cheque presented for collection it was dishonored due to insufficiency in funds.  Hence the complaint is filed for necessary relief alleging deficiency in service against opposite party.

 2.  Though opposite party sought repeated chances for version.  It was not filed.  Hence opposite party had to be  set exparte.  On 12/3/2010 the opposite party filed an application to set aside the exparte order as IA.No. 72/10 and also filed the version.  The forum allowed the IA 72/2010 on condition to pay cost of Rs.500/- to  complainant.  But  opposite party has not paid the cost.  Since the order in IA 72/2010 was not complied with by the opposite party the  version is not considered.

3.   The evidence in this case consists of the proof affidavit filed by PW1, the complainant and Exts.A1 to A8.  Ext.A1 is the copy of the receipt dtd.4/3/09 issued by opposite party.  Ext.A2 is the tour chart. Ext.A3 is the receipt, Ext A4 is the copy of the cheque, and Ext A5 is the copy of the counterfoil issued by the SBI Kanhangad.  Ext.A6 is the copy of the dishonor memo issued from SBI Calicut.  Ext.A7 is the memo issued from SBI Kanhangad to the complainant.

4.  Now the issue raised for consideration is whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and if so what is the relief, cost and compensation?

 5.    The case of the complainant that for her wish to visit Singapore -Malasia she joined the tour programme conducted by the opposite party by paying Rs.30, 000/-.  But the tour was not conducted as per the tour chart issued by the opposite party i.e. Ext.A1.  After that the opposite party agreed to conduct the tour on another date but that was also not done.  On perusal of Exts.A1 to A5 it is clear that the opposite party failed to conduct the tour programme as agreed by them.  Due to the failure to conduct the tour programme, the complainant forced to take back the amount she paid.  Then  opposite party issued a cheque for the amount and that  was bounced due to lack of fund in the account maintained by opposite party.  On perusal of the documents produced by the complainant it is very clear that the opposite party failed either to conduct the tour announced by them or to make the repayment of the amount.  Hence this is a best example for a case of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

6.         In the chief affidavit filed by the complainant it is stated that during the pendency   of this complaint, the opposite party refunded Rs.30, 000/- .  Hence the complainant  is not pressing for  that relief sought in the complaint. 

 7.        With respect to the relief for getting compensation for mental agony and sufferings is concerned definitely complainant might have suffered mental agony because once as per the instruction of opposite party she had left her home at Kasaragod and reached Thiruvananthapuram and stayed there one day.  But abruptly the tour is cancelled.  Therefore it is clear that she is prepared mentally and physically and made all arrangements to go for a tour but instead of getting pleasure the conduct of the opposite party give her great displeasure.  Hence we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to get compensation for the mental agony and hardships.

 8.    Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court held in Ghasziabad Development Authority vs. Balbir Singh reported in (2004) 5 SCC 65  that the Forum is empowered to award not only value of goods or services but also to compensate a consumer for the injustice suffered by him.  The word compensation may constitute actual loss or expected loss and may include to compensation for physical, mental ,even emotional suffering, insult, injury or loss.

      Therefore the complaint is allowed in part and the opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.25, 000/- as compensation to the complainant for mental pain and agony suffered by her due to the cancellation of the tour and also directed to pay Rs.3000/- towards costs of this proceedings.  Time for compliance of this order is 30 days from the date of receipt copy of order. Failing which , the amount of  compensation will carry interest @ 9 % per annum form the date of complaint  till payment.

Sd/                                                      Sd/                                              Sd/

MEMBER                                     MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT

Exts:

 .A1-  dtd.4/3/09 -the copy of the receipt issued by opposite party.

  A2 - tour chart.

  A3 - receipt,

  A4 - copy of the cheque,

  A5 -  copy of the counterfoil issued by the SBI Kanhangad. 

  A6-  copy of the dishonor memo issued from SBI Calicut.

 A7 -  memo issued from SBI Kanhangad to the complainant

 A8-copy of passport

PW1-Lakshmi.U-complainant

Sd/                         Sd/                        Sd/

MEMBER                                      MEMBER                                  PRESIDENT

eva/                     /Forwarded by Order/

                                                                              SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT