BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No. 66 of 2018

      Date of Instt. 19.02.2018

      Date of Decision: 29.11.2021

Sh. Ashok Kumar Sharma aged 64 years son of Late Sh. Jagdish Chander Sharma resident of 95, Urban Estate, Phase-II, Jalandhar City.

..........Complainant

Versus

1.       M/s Cox & Kings Ltd. Turner Morrison Building, 16, Bank    Street, Fort, Mumbai-40001 through its Managing Director.

2.       M/s Cox & Kings Ltd., 1-A, Siyu Complex, Near Model Town,       Gurudwara Sahib, Jalandhar through its Branch Head.

3.       Hardeep Kumar Sales Officer M/s Cox & Kings Ltd. 1-A, Siyu         Complex, Near Model Town,         Gurudwara Sahib, Jalandhar    through its Branch Head.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)                                          Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)

Present:        Sh. K. K. Arora, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.                        Sh. Gagandeep Mehta, Adv. Counsel for OPs No.1 to 3.

Order

Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)

1.                This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein he alleged that he had taken a tour from OPs and the name and the code of tour was European Discovery (In Lon Out Par) with Chamonix- (Close Group)- (59660287) vide booking No.834416 and dated 31.07.2017. That at the time of booking complainant told that OPs will arrange the stay of complainant in Appart’city Confort Marne La Vallee Val D’europe-Appart Ho 21 Avenue Des Frenes, 77144 Montevrain, France in Paris as per the hotel list of OPs which was also made available to complainant. The complainant alongwith his wife Mrs. Anju Sharma boarded flight as per the scheduled from Delhi and reached Paris via Muscat, London and other countries. On reaching Paris on 28.08.2017 complainant and his wife were taken to said hotel  and were initially given room No.208 and it was found that the AC of the said room was not functional. The matter was taken up by the complainant with the tour manager and the room was changed to 234. But again the AC of the said room was not functioning and complainant had to spend two sleepers night in the room in the said hotel and nobody cared for the comfort of complainant despite many complaints in this regard by complainant. The complainant had coughed up Rs.4,50,000/- for obtaining the said tour and it was told and agreed that the rooms of stay of complainant would be in good hotel and the rooms thereof will be well maintained. Complainant found everything contrary to the assurance given by OPs in this regard. Part of the payment was made through cheque and part through cash. The complainant had been persistently complaining to the tour manager but he paid no heed to the request of the complainant in this regard. That the complainant made a complaint in this regard through email on 30.08.2017 from Paris and reminder thereof was given on 04.09.2017 after the reaching India but OPs have not done anything concrete in this regard. Reply to the email was received on 04.09.2017 from OP, but the grievances of the complainant was not resolved and thereafter a legal notice dated 21.09.2017 was served upon the OPs to which they sent a reply dated 28.09.2017 wherein it was stated that they were conducting the enquiry into the matter and on 27.10.2017 they sent reply wherein they stated that the complaint of the complainant was resolved by their Tour Manager, but it is far away from truth. That the complainant has suffered great hardship, inconvenience, mental and physical harassment and pain and also suffered mental agony, physical and mental discomfort and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to pay a compensation and damages to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant with interest @ 12% per annum and further OPs be directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as cost of the proceedings.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that there is no cause of action wholly or in part that arose in favour of the complainant and against the OPs hence the present complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further submitted that in the present complaint the complainant has not produced an iota of evidence which will show any negligence or any kind of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Thus, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone i.e. for want of cause of action. It is further averred that the complainant has not come with clean hands as the complainant had filed the present mischievous, frivolous and vexatious complaint, which is liable to be dismissed. That there is no deficiency on the part of the OPs as defined in the Act, hence the present complaint is liable to be dismissed. That the present complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary party. The complainant has not come to this Commission with clean hands and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                In order to prove his case, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8 and closed the evidence.

4.                In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the counsel for the OPs No.1 to 3 tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OPW1/1 alongwith some documents Ex.OPW1/A and Ex.OPW1/B and closed the evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the written arguments submitted by learned counsel for the complainant as well as case file very minutely.

6.                The complainant has filed the present complaint on the ground that he had taken a tour from the OPs and the name and the code of tour was European Discovery (In Lon Out Par) with Chamonix- (Close Group)- (59660287) vide booking No.834416 and dated 31.07.2017. He has also produced on record the schedule of the tour and has alleged that when they reached Paris via Muscat, London and other countries and went to hotel Appart’City Confort Marne La Vallee Val D’europe-Appart Ho 21 Avenue Des Frenes, 77144 Montevrain, France, there they found that the AC of the room was not functional. When the matter was taken up by the complainant with the tour manager, his room was changed twice. Due to this negligence and deficiency in providing the services of the OPs, the complainant had to spend two sleepless nights and had to sit in the outer area which has caused them restlessness. This fact has been admitted by the OPs also that a tour was arranged by them and the issue arose regarding the AC in Paris. He has relied upon the terms and conditions and reply to notice given by the OPs and submitted that there is specific condition that in Europe, most of the countries there will be no AC, despite that they had provided the AC room to the complainant and the issue was resolved also. Ex.C-1 is the tickets of the complainant. Perusal of the            Ex.C-2 shows the detail of the rooms rent of Appart’city Confort Marne. As per this document, the rent of the room was minimum Rs.4,894/- and it was more as per the conditions of the rooms.

7.                It is not disputed that AC room was provided, but that was not functional. Though there is a condition that most hotels in Europe do not have AC or Fans, but in the case of complainant, the AC room was provided. Once the AC was provided, it was the duty of the OPs to provide fair services to their customers. It was their duty to provide the comfort and to make the customer feel the enjoyment of their tour for which they had spent a huge amount. Though the matter was resolved and the complainant was provided a proper room, but it was after shifting two rooms and due to this, the complainant had to face problem and had to spend two nights in the open and had suffered mental torture and harassment. Because of this reason, the charm of the tour was reduced as this was the last place to be visited and enjoyed as per the schedule of the OPs.  

8.                In view of the above detailed discussion, we find that the complainant has suffered mental tension and harassment and there is a negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs as the complainant spent two nights uncomfortably and we come to conclusion that the complainant is entitled for the relief and the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OPs are directed to refund the rent of rooms of hotel to Rs.15,000/- spent by complainant and further the OPs are directed to pay a compensation for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant as well as litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

9.                Copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dated          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna                Dr.Harveen Bhardwaj     

29.11.2021         Member                          Member           President