Delhi

New Delhi

CC/32/2006

J.K. Goyal & Anr. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. SOTC Holiday of India - Opp.Party(s)

27 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/32/06                                                                                                                                                                                Dated:

In the matter of:

Sh. J.K Goyal S/o late Sh. B.R Goyal

R/o G-125, Pushkar Enclave,

Paschim Vihar, New Delhi-1100063      

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

1. SOTC Holiday of India,
2. Kuoni Travel India Pvt. Ltd.,
3. Ms. Geeta Sharma (Sales Executive SOTC)
4. Mr. Sohan Singh, (Domestic Manager SOTC)

        All to be addressed at:

        ALPS Building, 1^st floor, 56, Janpath,

        New Delhi-110001

5. Diamond Tours & Travels,

        E-2, 2^nd floor, Main road, Kalkaji,

        New Delhi-19

6. Hotel Hyatt Regency,

        Near Bhikaji Cama Place,

        Ring Road, New Delhi

                                         ……..OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

ORDER

President: C.K Chaturvedi

The short complaint of deficiency on the part of OP is of not getting a confirmed return journey ticket on a trip from Delhi-Kathmandu-Delhi, for which OP charged Rs.26,265/- for to and fro journey on 26.05.05. He confronted OP with no confirmed status of return journey, but he was told that it was a request to Nepal Airlines, which will give him a confirm ticket for return journey. The complainant reached Hyatt Hotel in Kathmandu and requested Nepal Airline for return journey on the request of OP with him. It is alleged that no one attended to him and he had to run about for two days to get a confirm ticket which was of 28.05.05. He could not enjoy his trip to Kathmandu, which he has taken for leisure & rest for 2-3 days.

The OP in reply had admitted of the facts, but has taken a lame excuse that it did not expect complainant to return in hurried manner next day of arrival in Kathmandu. It stated that complainant wanted to take risk of going without conformed ticket, as he wanted to come back, before arrival of his son back at home.

We have considered the rival case. We do not accept the excuse of issuing unconfirmed ticket. OP should have not accepted fare for return journey, and would have gone only on issuing ticket and sent request to OP Nepal Airlines to help him getting ticket there. The objection of complainant for a relaxing visit to Nepal for 2-3 days has simply vanished, when he had to arrange himself & waste time and money.

We hold OP guilty of deficiency and award a compensation of Rs.20,000/- for the harassment & deficiency and Rs.10,000/- for 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 27.05.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(S.R. CHAUDHARY)

MEMBER