Delhi

New Delhi

CC/438/2012

Sudeshna Roy Chowdhury - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Hi Tours (India) Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

13 Jan 2020

ORDER

 

       CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC. 438/2012                                                                   Dated:

In the matter of:    

Sudeshna Roy Chowdhury,

W/o Amit Roy Chowdhury,

R/o I 1757(FF) Chittaranjan Park

New Delhi-110019                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ………… COMPLAINANT  

VERSUS

Hi Tours (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Having its office at:-

33-34, Regal Building,

Parliament Street,

New Delhi-110001                                                                                                         …………OPPOSITE PARTY

 

H.M. VYAS- MEMBER

ORDER

The crux of the complaint is that the complainant booked the tour of Greece and Italy for her family i.e.  herself, her husband, 2 children  and mother with the OP to commence 03/10/2010 to 09/10/2010 for Greece and 09/10/2010 to 15/10/2010 to Italy. The complainant paid amount of Rs. 01,73,155/- for Greece tour and Rs. 62,000/- for Italy tour to the OP. On 27/09/2010 the husband of the complainant suffered a heart attack and admitted to Hospital at United States, therefore, the complainant had to rush to United States to attend to her ailing husband. Before leaving for United States, the complainant vide her email dated 28/09/2010 requested to the OP to cancel the tour in such circumstances. Various correspondences through email were exchanged between the complainant and OP. The OP refunded Rs. 56,000/- on 15/10/2010 in respect of Italy tour. The OP vide email dated 07/10/2010 informed that the refund for the package for Greece will be in total 50%. If the complainant and her family travel in Greece for March, 2011 else 100% cancellation fee would apply. Thereafter, vide email dated 16/10/2010, the OP informed its counterpart in Greece to extend the date of travel till 30/04/2011. The OP vide email dated 13/11/2010 informed that refund of 50% cash was not possible as the counterpart as Greece had already paid, further to hotels (non-refundable) however, liberty with 50% credit has been allowed for travel in April,2011.

The request of the complainant to further extend date of travel to May, 2011 was declined by the OP, therefore, email dated 17/02/2011 prior for compensation with Rs. 02,35,490/- with 24% interest (pendentelite and future), Rs. 50,000/- towards harassment has been made.

OP filed written statement/version after notice, denying all allegations made in the complaint.

It is stated that the tours are booked with a bulk discount passed on to the Consumer as per cancellation policy, The cancellation charged per person within 7 days or prior to departure or a no show on the tour is 100%. The OP has already refunded Rs. 56,000/- and the complainant was also given option for the adjustment of the 50% of tour cost paid for Greece, if the complainant travel within next 6 months. The amount of Greece tour being paid to overseas agent/tour operator was not refunded even after due persuasion. While denying the allegations request for dismissal of the complaint has been made.

The complainant filed rejoinder and evidence by way of affidavit and the OP also filed affidavit in evidence.

Both the parties have addressed oral arguments.

We have considered the material placed before us and the submissions made by the parties.

From the submissions of the parties the undisputed facts are that the complainant cancelled the tour owing to her husband ailment. Payment of Rs. 01,73,155/- made to OP. The OP refunded Rs. 56,000/- to the complainant. The OP had offered a Greece tour during next 6 months subject to payment of 50% of the tour cost and agreed to adjust remaining 50% at its ends. In other words it is clear that the OP did retain 50% of the cost of Greece tour even after cancellation of the initial tour, however, did not agreed to refund.

In the evidence affidavit filed by the complainant/ in para 20 it is mentioned that 50% booking amount of total cost of EUR 1415 was available with the OP and even then the OP did not make any effort to refund the said amount.

From the above facts and the submissions made by the parties, it is evident that the OP with held 50% of the Greece tour cost which was offered to be adjusted in the future Greece Tour if availed till April, 2011 and the same was not refunded to the complainant, despite persuasion and request.

The offer to extend the tour up to April, 2011 made by the OP could not availed by the complainant. In this premise and facts, we hold the OP to be deficient in service and adopting unfair trade practice to the extent that the OP retained 50% of the unexpensed tour cost for Greece for no valid reason. The cost of tour for Greece was admittedly for Rs.  Rs. 01,73,155/- we therefore direct as under:-

1. To refund 50% i.e. 86,578/- (round off) to the complainant alongwith 9% simple interest from the date of filing of this complaint i.e. 01/05/2012.
2. To pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- for harassment and litigation cost.

The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of this order.

A copy of this order each be sent to each party free of cost by post as statutorily required.

Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in.

File be consigned to record room.

Pronounced in open Forum on13/01/2020  

 

      (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

      PRESIDENT

                (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                                         (H M VYAS)

                        MEMBER                                                                                      MEMBER