Delhi

New Delhi

CC/1087/2007

Mohomed Desai - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Delhi Travel Development Centre - Opp.Party(s)

18 May 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/1087/07                                                                                                                                                                              Dated:

In the matter of:

Mahomed Desai,

Desai’s General Hardware,

P.O Box 15507, Ashwood Pinetown,

3608, Durban, South Africa

 

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

 

The Manager,

Delhi Travel Development Centre,

G-39, Pawan House, Middle Circle,

Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001

 

                                         ………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

ORDER

President: C.K Chaturvedi

 

The Complainant a South African Citizen, living at Durban, made a visit to India to visit various places as a tourist. He got in touch with OP, who organizes such travel & arrangements. He arrived in Delhi on 22.01.07, and met Mr. Satish Sharma & Mr. Bilal Ahmad, and requested them to make travel & accommodation arrangement for different places as informed by him. He was assured of the best and complainant paid $3000 by credit card and cash totaling to Rs.1,35,000/-. He was assured stay in good 5 star or 4 star hotels. He has planned to visit in India till 12^th Feb.2007. It is alleged that OP deliberately failed to abide by his instruction and he was made to stay in substandard hotel where the rates were $35 per night. He visited Srinagar, Agra, Jaipur & Mumbai. He was made to pay for extra fee for guide despite the OP collected full payment for such expenses in advance. Frustrated with OP, he wrote to OP on 29.01.07 to cancel all subsequent booking for Mumbai onwards after 31^st Jan 2007, for Surat, Goa, Bangalore, Cochin and Kumarakom. He requested full refund after deduction of appropriate charges for visits earlier. According to him all the expenses for the visits amount to not more than Rs.25,000/- and he demanded balance of Rs.1,10,000/-. The OP after much negotiation agreed first to pay Rs.55,000/- and later on the matter was finally settled at Rs.70,000/- which was accepted by OP, as conveyed in email of OP to complainant on 13.03.07. The complainant accepted this offer by his email of 07.05.07 as initially he was reluctant to accept less than Rs.1,00,000/-. The emails exchanged between the parties are Annexure C9, C10 and other emails showing negotiation are also enclosed with complaint.

It is alleged that despite complainant agreeing to accept Rs.70,000/- as full and final settlement,  OP did not comprisal figure forward to pay it, and ignored his calls & requests, which showed mala fide intentions, though OP, itself had accepted Rs.70,000/- as comprisal figure.

In the circumstances, Complainant got served a legal notice, through his advocate, for which OP replied. In the reply, OP did not talk of settlement at Rs/70,000/- but went back and denied even initial offer of Rs.39,684/- and denied all allegations. The reply is full of denials of everything.

 We have considered the material on record, evidence and submission made. We have gone through the vast. Correspondences between the parties on deficiencies noted by complainant in tour, leading to cancellation of booking after 11^th Jan 07 onwards due to substandard stay. The OP has agreed to some deficiencies and after deducting charges has finally come to settle it at refund of Rs.70,000/-. In the face of such clear admission, the attitude of OP, in contesting the case in Forum, through advocates, who have adopted a usurping attitude by denying every allegation against them, rather than coming straight forward only at the hope that the complainant living abroad cannot stay here to file a case to contest after legal notice. The steadfastness of complainant had dashed the hopes of OP.

We have considered the evidence and find that his case speaks for itself, and his frustration with OP arrangements, leading to cancellation of tour and demanded refund. The complainant, who lives in South Africa, naturally expected very comfortable stay in hotels, particularly when he did not negotiate the prices and in advance paid Rs.1,35,000/-. The OP has certainly failed to his expectations as tourist, and brought no evidences to show types of hotels in which he was made to stay. We are shocked at the attitude of OP to a foreigner, who carries the poor image of India, abroad and by sharing it with other, Indian hospitality is harmed.

The OP has duped the complainant by not returning the settled amount, till he was in India, and has forced to enter into litigation for last 8 years. He failed to provide right kind of hotels for stay during his tour, and forced him by deficiency to abandon his tour. It spoilt his total pleasure of visiting India which was the object of his tour & travel. The tour & travel industry is supposed to cater to leisure of travelers and not to add to their woes. Thus, holding OP guilty of deficiency and unfair trade practices, we order as under:

1. OP will return Rs.70,000/- agreed to be returned in its email of 7th March 2007 to complainant.
2. It will pay the agreed amount of Rs.70,000/- with interest of 12% per annum from date of agreement till payment.
3. It will pay compensation of Rs.1 lakh for deficiency, harassment, frustration and mental agony and litigation expenses.

 

The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken against OP under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

        Pronounced in open Court on 18.05.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(S.R. CHAUDHARY)                 (Ritu Garodia)

MEMBER                                  MEMBER