Order-20.
Date-17/08/2016.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Complainant by filing this case stats that he booked for a tourist program along with his wife and for that tour to Dubai and Abu Dhabi complainant paid to O.P.-1 M/s Sunny Sand Holidays Pvt. Ltd. Rs.22,000/- by cheque on 30/07/2015. On 04/07/2015 O.P.-1 asked the complainant to pay more money. Accordingly complainant paid Rs.87,530/- by cheque on 04/09/2015. On 06/10/2015 complainants were handed over the electronic ticket and electronic tourist visa of United Arab Emirates by O.P.-2 on behalf of O.P.-1. The detailed tourist schedule was appeared with the ticket and visa. On 06/10/2015 O.P.-1 left the liability to O.P.-2. O.P.-2 Absolutely Travels Pvt. Ltd. arranged for tour of complainant and his wife by Etihad Flight to and fro. O.P.-2 charged extra amount instead of original promises. Inferior quality of hospitality including food and stay at hotels did not match with the promises regarding hotels and food made by O.P.-1. On 28/10/2015 complainants through an e-mail asked O.P.-1 to refund the amount paid in excess. He also expressed his dissatisfaction regarding the hospitality treatment which he and his wife received during the stay at hotels. On 18/11/2015 O.P.-1 acknowledged the receipt of mail but refused to refund the extra amount. Hence complainant prays for sending show cause notice to the O.Ps. for cheating, unfair and deceptive trade practice. Complainant prays for refund of Rs.52,530/-. Complainant also prays for compensation for causing harassment and mental agony and a litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-. Complainant prays for interest at the rate of 4 percent p.a. for delayed refund of money.
In his written version O.P.-1 states that complainant has no locus standi to lodge the case. Complainant has lodged this case with malafide intention and ulterior motive. All the allegations levelled against O.P.-1 are denied and disputed. O.P.-1 never demanded extra money from the complainant. Complainant failed to annex any sheet in support of his document. O.P.-1 issued valid receipt against each payment. O.P.-2 is related with this complainant. O.P.-1 has performed his liability after conducting the tour program. O.P.-1 has never neglected complainant. O.P.-1 has never shifted his liability to O.P.-2. O.P.-1 also states that the complaint is barred by jurisdictional point. O.P.-1 submits that they have taken money from complainant according to the agreement made by and between them and they have performed their liabilities after conducting tour program and they have never neglected the complainant during foreign tour. O.P. provided best quality of comfort, good food to the complainant. Etihad Flight was more comfortable than emirates flight. O.P.-1 states that it seems to strange to him that after enjoying the tour complainant demanded refund of money. Complainant wants to take advantage from the O.P. There is no question of negligence, deficiency and unfair trade practice. He is not entitled to get any compensation. All the allegations are frivolous.
Decision with Reasons
On proper consideration of complaint, written version and evidence-in-chief including documents it is found that complainant and his wife undertook a tour to Dubai and Abu Dhabi from 18/10/2015 to 23/10/2015. But complainant did not get all the facilities which he expected from tour operators. O.P.-2 provided the complainant with air-ticket and visa and O.P.-2 demanded extra money of Rs.52,530/- from complainant. The complainant has already paid Rs.1,63,530/- to the O.P.-1 for himself and his wife. Then no question of demanding extra money of Rs.52,530/- arises. But complainant on 28/10/2015 claimed refund of such extra amount of Rs.52,530/- which was taken from complainant illegally by O.P.-2. Complainant informed O.P.-1 on 9th November,2015. On 18th November,2015. O.P.-1 informed complainant that he has already intimated the legal department about charging extra amount of Rs.52,530/- but there was no whisper regarding refund of the excess amount of Rs.52,530/- and they did not challenge complainant’s statement. Somehow they try not to return the amount. If O.P.-2 is not made the necessary party then the question of giving back the extra amount of Rs.52,530/- does not arise. Complainant had to pay extra amount for which they were not prepared. O.P.-1 in their W.V. stated that complainants travelled by Etihad Flight which was more comfortable than Emirates Flight. But there is no scope of comparison. Complainants were not satisfied with the hospitality offered by the O.Ps.
On overall evaluation of the entire materials on record and breach of contract in between parties we are convinced that complainant has been able to prove deficiency and negligence on the part of the O.Ps. O.Ps. have done deceitful manner of trade and deceived the complainant by taking huge amount of money.
In view of the findings complaint succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered
That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the O.Ps. with cost of Rs.10,000/-.
O.Ps. jointly and severally are directed to pay Rs.52,530/- which was taken extra beyond the actual cost.
O.Ps. are further directed to pay rs.10,000/-as compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment.
O.P.s are directed to comply the order within 30 days from the date of this order failing which complainant will be at liberty to put the order into execution as mentioned u/s-25 read with Section-27 of the C. P. Act,1986.
