Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/632/2021

Mrs Ninder Kapoor - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s TMC Travel Solutions - Opp.Party(s)

Raman Sharma

05 Mar 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/632/2021
Date of Institution	:	20.9.2021
Date of Decision	:	5/03/2024

 

1. Mrs Ninder Kapoor w/o Sh Rajan Kapoor resident of H.No.2180, Sector 15-C, Chandigarh,

2. Ms Arshia Kapoor d/o Sh Rajan Kapoor resident of H. No.2180, Sector 15-C, Chandigarh

3. Mrs Mridul Sharma w/o Sh Raman Sharma Resident of H. No. 5763-A, Sector 38-West, Chandigarh.

4 Aayush Sharma s/o Sh Raman Sharma Resident of H.No. 5763-A, Sector 38-West, Chandigarh.

5. Arnav Sharma s/o Sh Raman Sharma Resident of H.No.5763-A, Sector 38-West, Chandigarh.

6. Mrs Ranjot Kaur w/o Sh Narinder Pal singh Resident of H. No. 5763-B, Sector 38-West, Chandigargh.

 

Versus

 

1. M/s TMC Travel Solutions, Plot No 99-100, Ward No.6-A, Adipur, Tehsil Gandhidham, Distt. Kuchh, Gujarat through its Prop/Partner Mohinder Bansal (To be served through OP No.2)

2. Mohinder Bansal son of Sh Des Raj Bansal Resident of Tapa Mandi, Railway Street, Bank Side OBC Bank, Distt. Barnala

 

          (To be served through the Jail Superintendent, Sub Jail, Hamirpur where he is lodged He is presently in judicial custody in P.Ch. Regd.no.239-2018 (State of HP v Mohinde Bansal) and is lodged in Distt. Jail, Hamirpur, trial of which is pending in the court of S Nitin Mittal, Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Hamirpur, HP)

 

Opposite Parties

 

CORAM :	SHRI PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SHRI SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Atul Goyal, Advocate for complainants.
	:	OPs ex-parte.

 

Per Pawanjit Singh, President

1. The present consumer complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 34 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the opposite parties  (hereinafter referred to as the OPs). The brief facts of the case are as under :-

1. It transpires from the averments as projected in the consumer complaint that the complainant and their family members being friends  had planned a trip to Dubai  from 20^th June  to 25^th June 2018 and approached OPs,  who had also given itinerary and inclusions offered contained in the brochure Annexure C-1.  During that period,  the 5^th Punjab State Midterm Conference & Summer Camp  also to be held at Dubai in which the complainant No.2 who was dental doctor  was also allowed to take his family members. For booking of trip including air tickets and for their stay, the complainants were asked to pay an amount of Rs.35,000/- for each individual and the following payments  were made by the complainants to the OPs:-

Amount paid by	Total amount paid
Complainants NO.1&2	Rs.1,04,750/
Complainants No.3 to 5	1,40,000/-
Complainant No.6	70,000/-

                                                                                                 

 The aforesaid payment was also conveyed to OPs vide emails Annexure C-2(colly).  On 13.6.2018, a  message was circulated by the  Indian Dental Council, Punjab that there was some problem with programme and trip was in disarray and accordingly complainant No.2 sent a message to OPs on whatsapp about the said problem and requested the OPs to refund the entire deposited amount. On 13.6.2018 when the complainant tried to contact OP No.2, he was found to be lodged in judicial custody  in Hamirpur, Himchal Pradesh.  On 14.6.2018  the daughter of  OP No.2 sent a message to the complainant the rates of air tickets are very high  and as the complainants have visa valid upto 10^th August 2018, the same can be purchased afresh from Amritsar-Chandigarh, In reply to the said mail, the complainants again intimated the daughter of OP No.2 that as the vacations are only in the month of June and not in July, the programme cannot be re-scheduled.  As the Ops have not applied for the VISA, the aforesaid act of OPs is an act of cheating and again OPs were requested to refund the aforesaid amount. Later on the complainants came to know  that OP No.2  is in judicial custody and facing trial in approximately in 74 criminal cases and is in judicial lockup  in the District  Jail Hamirpur. Thereafter the complainants tried to contact the Ops with the request to refund the amount paid  but to no avail. The aforesaid act amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. OPs were requested several times to admit the claim, but, with no result.  Hence, the present consumer complaint.

2. OP No.1 was properly served and when it did not turn up before this Commission, despite proper service, it was proceeded against ex-parte on 25.9.2023.
3. OP No.2 resisted the consumer complaint and filed its written version, inter alia, taking preliminary objections of maintainability, cause of action, mis-joinder of parties and alleged that the answering has no concern with business of firm, as he is neither proprietor of M/s TMC travel solutions nor is partner and moreover, mobile No.7878642123 does not relate to the answering OP and no amount has been credited in the account of the answering OPs.  On merits, the facts as stated in the preliminary objections have been re-iterated. The cause of action set up by the complainant is denied.  The consumer complaint is sought to be contested.
4. However, after filing of reply none has turned up on behalf of OP No.2, hence, vide order dated 4.5.2023 OP No.2 was proceeded against exparte.
5. In rejoinder, complainant reiterated  the claim put forth in the consumer complaint and prayer has been made that the consumer complaint be allowed as prayed for.

2. In order to prove their case, contesting parties have tendered/proved their evidence by way of respective affidavits and supporting documents.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the file carefully, including the written arguments on record.
   1. At the very outset, it may be observed that when it is an admitted case of the complainant that  the complainants had deposited the amount with the Ops as mentioned in para 1(a) above  for their trip to Dubai  from 20^th June to 25^th June 2018 and the Ops neither purchased the air tickets nor obtained the VISA and during pendency of the complaint the counsel for the complainant vide his statement dated 25.1.2024 stated that partial refund of Rs.35,000/- each  has already been ordered to Sh. Rajan Sharma husband of complainant No.1 and father of complainant No.2 and further to Sh. Raman Sharma, husband of complainant No.3 and father of complainants No.4 and 5 and to Sh. Narinder Pal Singh husband of complainant no.6 vide order dated 24.8.2021 passed by this Commission and now the complainants are only contesting for remaining amount from the OPs, the case is reduced to a narrow compass as it is to be determined if  the complainants are entitled for the following amounts from the OPs.

Amount paid by	Total amount paid to OPs	Amount already ordered to be refunded vide order dated 24.8.2021	Balance amount
Complainants NO.1&2	Rs.1,04,750/-	35000/-	69,750/-
Complainants No.3 to 5	1,40,000/-	35000/-	1,05,00/-
Complainant No.6	70,000/-	35000/-	35000/-

2. The receipt of aforesaid deposited amount has categorically been admitted by the Ops vide mail Annexure C-2(colly).
3. Perusal of Annexure C-1 indicates that  the OPs had  made various offers to the general public including the complainants. Annexure C-2(colly) are the mails which indicate that the complainants deposited the amount with the OPs on different dates for their trip to Dubai.
4. As the entire evidence led by the complainants  stand unrebutted by OP No.1 who did not appear  before this Commission despite of its proper service whereas OP No.2 has not adduced any document on record to rebut the evidence led by the complainant, hence the aforesaid act of OPs of not refunding the amount paid by the complainants amounts to deficiency in service.  However, since it has come on record that vide order dated 24.8.2021  partial amount has already been ordered to be refunded as discussed above in para 3(i), the complainants are entitled for balance amount as per details tabulated in para 3(i) alongwith interest against each balance amount.   

4. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds, the same is hereby partly allowed and OPs are directed as under :-

1. to refund the balance amount to   the complainants as per details given in the table in para 3(i) above i.e. balance amount alongwith interest @9% p.a. from the date of institution of the present consumer complaint i.e. till onwards.
2. to pay an amount of ₹3000/-  to each complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to them;
3. to pay ₹10,000/- to the complainants as costs of litigation.

5. This order be complied with by the OPs within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.
7. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced 5/03/2024 mp			Sd/- [Pawanjit Singh] President
			Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana] Member