Date of filing :21.12.2017

Judgment : Dt.28.6.2019

Mrs. Balaka Chatterjee, Hon’ble Member

            This petition of complaint is filed under section 12 of C.P.Act, 1986 by Sarajit Deb alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party (referred as OP hereinafter) M/S Flying Squirrel Holidays.

            Facts in brief are that the Complainant being a member of the Calcutta Club came to know from the circular issued by the said club in December, 2015 that a foreign trip to the Scandanavian countries as well as part of Russia was going to be organized by the OP and the Complainant being agreeable to take part of the said trip entered into an agreement with OP and as per the said agreement paid entire consideration amount in advance. It is stated by the Complainant that two groups were formed for the said proposed tour and tour itinerary was provided by the OP to the members of said groups including the Complainant and the first group was scheduled to start travel on and from 17.5.2016 and 2^nd group to start the same on and from 27.5.2016. It is also stated by the Complainant that he along with his wife was to travel with the first group but due to illness of his wife they opted 1for travelling with the second group and on 9^th May, 2016 the Complainant was handed over detailed itinerary, air tickets and other travel related documents and as per clauses of the said itinerary the Complainant along with his wife reported at Kolkata air port at 18.00 hrs on 27.5.2016 to avail flight No.EY255 which they did and after a long journey of 22 hrs. they reached Copenhagen Air port but after reaching Copenhagen the Complainant along with his wife had to wait 45 minutes for next conveyance and, therefore had to carry their own luggage which was to have been carried by the OP. The Complainant has stated that a grand tour to the Tevoli Ganden was promised but no guide was turned up, further, although, 30^th May, 2016 was scheduled for visiting Copenhagen to Freidrikshavan, Roskilde Cathedral and Anderson Museum as an optional town. The Complainant was compelled to reach the Cathedral at 9.30a.m. but due to ignorance of OP they had to wait another 30 minutes for the Cathedral to open. The Complainant has further stated that they could not visit the Hans Christian Museum, which was his childhood dream as the museum was remained closed on the scheduled date of visiting and same thing happened while visiting Dalsnibba Mountain Pass which is the highest motorable Fjord Road in Europe and the tourist bus which was provided by the OP to take the tourist on the sight spots was not upto standard. The Complainant has further stated that while opted for shifting from first group to the 2^nd group, he had to cancel previous booking of Hotel for staying four days more in Russia which was agreed between the parties but the OP refused to return the amount paid by the Complainant to the OP in connection with the said booking and had to book hotel Petrovka Loft on their own. It is further alleged by the Complainant that the OP did not even book his air ticket from Delhi to Kolkata though the OP was supposed to bring back all the members to Kolkata and being aggrieved he sent several mails to the OP demanding explanation and compensation and lastly on 25.7.2017 sent Demand Notice through Ld. Advocate but the OP sent reply denying all the allegations and, therefore the Complainant by filing the instant Consumer Complaint prays for direction upon the OP to refund Rs25,123/- together with interest @ 18% p.a., to pay compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- and other reliefs.

            The Complainant annexed some documents including receipt showing subscription paid by Complainant to Calcutta Club Ltd. Receipt dt.6.4.2016, 21.5.2016, 7.1.2016, 10.2.2016. Tour itinerary, service contract form, Advocate’s letter dt.25.7.2017, reply dt.18.8.2017.

            The OP contested the case by filing written version denying and disputing all the allegations made out in the petition of complaint stating inter alia that tour for first group was scheduled to be started  on and from 17.5.2016 and the Complainant instructed the OP to book accommodation from 4.6.2016 to 9.6.2016 and as per said instruction and approval of the Complainant, the OP booked ‘Petrovka Loft’ which was much low in quality though 4 star hotels were available in the same vicinity. The OP has further stated that the Complainant wanted to come to Kolkata via Delhi and as per request of the Complainant, flight tickets were booked but sudden change of tour plan by the Complainant due to illness of his wife he decided to defer his journey but the Airlines declined to afford ticket on other date on same rate. However, the Complainant purchased train ticket from Delhi to Kolkata on their own and it was Complainant’s conscious decision to come Kolkata via Delhi and several communications were made in this respect through e-mail. It is further stated by the OP that for promotion of business they persuaded the Hotel Authority to refund the booking amount of hotel namely ‘Petrovka loft’ for the period from 4.6.2016 to 9.6.2016 but the Complainant did not avail the service as such and the Hotel Authority released an amount of Rs.5865.80/- and the same was intimated to the Complainant by an e-mail dt.26.7.2016 for collecting the said amount. It is also stated by the OP that the Complainant did not annexed the complete itinerary to suppress the fact. To sum up denying all material allegations the OP has stated that they have no deficiency in providing service and, as such, is not liable to compensate the Complainant as prayed for. Accordingly, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the consumer Complaint.

            The OP annexed documents of booking of hotel namely ‘Petrovka loft’ for a period 4.6.2016 to 9.6.2016 , Agent Invoice showing cancellation of booking, statement of accounts, payment details, flight ticket of EY255, AB7495, AB8032 dt.17.5.2016 and 18.5.2016 respectively and flight ticket of EY 0068. EY0218, 9W0903 dt.9.6.2016 and 10.6.2016 respectively, e-mail dt.4.5.2016 sent by Shankar Basu to the Complainant, e-mail dt.4.5.2016 sent by Complainant to Mr. Shankar Bose and several e-mail correspondences showing steps taken for demanding refund of booking amount of Petrovka loft, e-mail dt.25.7.2016 sent to the Complainant intimating an amount of Rs.5,865.80 has been credited to the A/C of the OP. Tour itinerary from 28.5.2016 to 10.6.2016.

            The Complainant adduced evidence annexing a copy of representation of one Pradyot Kumar Chatterjee and one V.K.Sethi in respect of which the OP filed questionnaire and the Complainant filed reply. Similarly, the OP adduced evidence to which the Complainant filed questionnaire and the OP filed reply.

            In course of argument Ld. Advocate on behalf of the Compainant narrated the facts mentioned in the petition of complaint.

            Ld. Advocate on behalf of OP filed brief notes of argument and submitted that at Copenhagen airport the group members were required to wait for vehicle and to take their luggage and in case of visiting the Cathedral the team leader took the group well advance on the time of opening so that the members could patiently collect their entry ticket and enjoy the visit from the beginning.

            Points for determination

1. Whether there is deficiency in providing service?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as prayed for?

Decision with reasons

Both points are taken up together for comprehensive discussion and decision.

Admittedly, the Complainant along with his wife being a part of a group of members of Calcutta Club went to the Scandanavian Countries as well as parts of Russia for a tour conducted by the OP on and from 28.5.2016 to 10.6.2016 and paid entire consideration amount. It is also admitted that the Complainant agreed to tour with another group but he had to change his plan owing to some personal grounds and joined a second tourist group. Admittedly, the Complainant along with his wife wanted to stay four days more in Russia and, accordingly, a hotel was booked for a period of 4^th June, 2016 to 9^th June, 2016 and owing to the changing situation said booking was cancelled.

The Complainant has alleged that after reaching Copenhagen Airport they had to wait for more than 45 minutes for next conveyance to reach the hotel and moreover, high standard of service has not been provided such as no wi.fi connection and mobile phone charging points were available in the buses used to take the members on different sightseeing locations, booking amount has not been refunded in spite of cancellation of booking of hotel ‘Petrovka loft’ non-appearance of guide spoilt the pleasure of visiting trivoli garden, due to un-professional approach Hans Christian Museum and Dalsuibba Pass could not be visited and, moreover, the Complainant had to purchase air tickets from Delhi to Kolkata on his own.

On careful perusal of documents on record and careful consideration of arguments advanced by the parties respectively it appears that the group of members including the Complainant had to wait at Copenhagen air port, wi fi connection etc were not available in the bus these services have not been included in the tour itinerary.

Regarding visiting Trivoli Garden which was included on the 2^nd day’s programme it appears from inclusion cause of tour itinerary that local guide was to have been provided for tour in Copenhagen, Oslo, Bergen and Stockholm, Tiroli Garden is situated in Copenhagen and therefore, the Complainant was entitled to have a guide there. Therefore, deviation from promise staring that history of the Trivoli Garden available in the internet cannot be accepted.

Regarding allegation of unprofessional approach for which Complainant did not get any opportunity to visit Hans Christian Museum and Dalsuibba Pass as both of those places were remained closed on the scheduled date of visiting. It is stated by the OP that due to decision of Museum Authority the Museum was closed on that day which was beyond their control and due to bad weather viewpoint of Dalsuibba Pass was closed which was also beyond their control.

In this regards the OP has stated that they refunded the money of entry fee of the museum and on consultation with the group decision was taken to skip view point. However, on perusal of Para No.24 of written version, it appears that the Complainant has not received the amount yet and, therefore, it is evident that the Complainant has been deprived of visiting those places properly. However, it is also evident that the OP as per itinerary made arrangement and took the tourist to the Museum and Dalsnibba Pass. Had there any intention on the part of the OP to skip those places that would have been considered deficiency on their part. However, the OP did not disclose the amount of visiting charge which they claimed to have refunded and, therefore, the amount is required to be refunded.

Regarding allegation of not providing air ticket from Delhi to Calcutta, it is evident from e-mail dt.4.5.2016 from the Complainant to Shankar Bose (OP herein) that the Complainant himself booked tickets for Rajdhani Express train for travelling from Delhi to Calcutta and there was no requirement of the plane ticket from Delhi to Calcutta and no averment has been made to substantiate that the expenses was supposed to bear by OP.

It is therefore, evident from discussion made hereinabove that the OP failed to provide guide at Trivoli Garden as per itinerary provided by him and no amount has been received yet by the Complainant as refund of entry fee to the Hans Christian Museum.

Regarding refund of booking amount of hotel ‘Petrovka loft’ we find that the said booking was not at all the part of tour itinerary even though the OP booked the same and on their persuasion an amount of Rs.5,865.80 has been refunded by the Hotel which was duly intimated to the Complainant by e-mail dt.20.6.2016 and further the Complainant was requested to collect the same by e-mail dt.26.6.2016 but the Complainant did not. It is also found that the hotel was booked on payment of Rs.8,174.86 and the authority disbursed the amount after deducting payable tax and one night charge.

Considering the situation, in our view if a direction is given to the OP to refund of booking amount towards  cancellation of booking of Petrovka loft of Rs.5,865.80 to the Complainant and entry fee of Hans Christian Museum the justice would served the purpose. Since both the sides did not state the amount we think an amount of Rs.1,000/- may be allowed. We do not find any ground to allow compensation and cost.

Point Nos.1 & 2 are decided accordingly.

            In the result, the Consumer Complainant succeeds in part.

            Hence,

                                    ordered

            That CC/707/2017 is allowed in part on contest without cost. The OP is directed to refund Rs.5,865.80 towards booking amount of hotel along with an amount of Rs.1,000/- the approximate amount towards refund of entry fee of Hans Christian Museum to the Complainant within 30days failing which the entire amount shall carry interest @ 10% p.a. till realization.