FINAL ORDER/JUDGEMENT
Smt. SAHANA AHMED BASU, Member,
The case of the complainants in brief is that, the complainants and other group members belong to Calcutta Club went to conduct tour of South Africa, Kenya (Masai Mara) and Zimbabwe (Victoria Falls) by availing the service of the OPs and for such reason the complainant paid the entire consideration amount before the start of the tour to the OPs. During the said tour the OPs failed to provide proper services. In the offer made by the OPs the foreign component of the tour cost was calculated at Rand being INR 04.50, while taking the final payment, the OPs calculated the Rand @ INR 5.95. Further the date of the travel was changed by the OPs without taking prior consent or at least giving prior intimation to the complainant and all other travelers. Original itinerary had mentioned about two groups. Group1 will travel from 19/03/2018 to 03/04/2018 and Group2 will travel from 26/03/2018 to 10/04/2018. But in the revised itinerary there was a single group and travel scheduled for 22/03/2018 to 06/04/2018. During the flights from Kolkata – Mumbai – Nairobi – Johannesburg OPs offered only vegetarian meals.In the itinerary one night stay at Johannesburg on arrival was mentioned, but in reality OPs made to go them directly to Sun City. As per the itinerary there would be an Indian meal on fourth night, ultimately it was found that in all dinners at South Africa (six in numbers), the group was taken to sub-standard Indian Restaurants and made to have sub-standard Indian meals. When it brought into the attention of the OPs by the complainant vide email dated 24/03/2018 it was assured by the OPs that the matter is being looked into. However nothing was done. At Sun City two non-members of Calcutta Club was included in the group whereas it was clearly mentioned in the tour plan that the tour was conducted for Calcutta Club members or their guests. It is the usual practice that a maximum of 11/12 hours would be the travel time each day. But on 26/03/2018 the group started from Knysna at 07.45 am in the morning and reached Cape Town at 10.00 pm. In Cape Town the complainant along with others was put up at a hotel called Inn-On-The-Square whereas in the itinerary it was mentioned that the group would be staying for three nights either Hotel Hilton or Hotel Capatonian. On a random search through a hotel booking site it was found that there was a massive price difference between the standard of hotel that the members were assured of in the itinerary and where the group was made to stay. The difference per night was approximately for three nights INR 30,000 -14,590 = INR 15,410. This difference in rates of two hotels was brought to the attention of the OPs and a refund of INR was sought from the OPs which was refused by the OPs. As per itinerary a visit to Lake Naivasha was part of the tour which was not happened. The complainant sent several emails seeking explanations and compensation for each and every failure to the OPs. OPs chose not to compensate. Accordingly the complainant sent legal notice to OPs on 27/07/2019 which was replied by the OPs on 02/08/2019 denying all allegations. Therefore the complainant has compelled to seek relief / reliefs before this Commission.
The instant consumer complaint is contested by the OPs by filing WV contending inter alia, that the petition of complaint is false, frivolous , baseless and not maintainable either in law or in facts and also bad for non-joinder of party. In November 2017 the complainant and other group members of Calcutta Club expressed their interest to avail services of the OPs for travelling South Africa, Kenya and Zimbabwe and therefore an initial quote was given by the OPs. One member of Calcutta Club namely Mr. Anjan Mandal was coordinating with the OPs regarding the said tour and it was initially represented to the OP that minimum 60 member would travelling on the tour. However finally 18 members travelled and availed services of the OPs. Despite substantial reduction in the minimum members, OPs did not escalate the initial quote offered to Calcutta Club. Complainants, after understanding the terms and conditions of the Booking Form and being completely satisfied, booked the tour on 20/01/2018 and accordingly maid a payment of INR 50,000 vide his Credit Card and thereafter a further payment of INR 50,000 was received from the complainants as booking. The final itinerary together with the revised Hotel details was also circulated to the complainants and other travelling group members vide e-mail dated 15/02/2018. Negotiation between the parties commenced in the month of November 2017and the initial quote was given to them in November 2017when the existing rate of ZAR was approx. 1 ZAR @ INR 4.050. The revised itinerary and also in the booking Form, it has been categorically mentioned that the ZAR Rate will be applicable as prevailing on the date of final payment as per Thomas Cook rate of exchange. The revised date of travel was negotiated and discussed with the travelling group and in this connection, the complainant and other travelling members have agreed to the revised travel schedule. Further food on the flights are arranged and served by airlines through its caterers. OPs have already updated the concerned airline about the food preference of the complainant; however the concerned airline failed to adhere to the preference that was updated by the OPs and in this connection the OPs had also raised a complaint with the concerned airline. OPs upgraded the tour from one night stay at Johannesburg to Sun City for avoiding check-in/check-out of Hotels after every night so that the complainant and other guests can enjoy two nights stay at Sun City in a more relaxed way without having to travel everyday. Even otherwise, the itinerary never stipulated any sightseeing in Johannesburg. It is also stated that OPs never promised local or continental food as per the itinerary as alleged. The presumption of the complainant that they would be having only one Indian meal on fourth night and rest of the meals would be local cuisine is wrong and misplaced for which OPs cannot be hold responsible. It was not possible for the OPs to cancel the meals which were already booked at the Indian Restaurants since more than two months ago. However, OPs took sincere efforts in providing the group with some continental cuisines wherever possible, despite no commitment by the OPs in its itinerary. Although Calcutta Club committed that 60-65 passengers to be booked, but in reality only 18 members travelled. Therefore OPs have to combine two of the other group passengers with the group of complainant. However this never impacted the quality of services offered to the 18 Calcutta Club travelling members. It is submitted by the OPs that there were comfort breaks taken during this journey and it is denied by the OPs that they broke rules or that the entire group was under duress as falsely alleged by the complainant. It is also denied by the OPs that the itinerary mentioned that the group would be staying in Hotel Hilton as alleged. The calculation of the room tariff as sought to be made by the complainant is irrational and misconceived. Since the visit at Lake Naivasha could not be arranged, therefore the OPs arranged the tour to Lake Elementiata. An additional Game drive was also booked for the travelling group in Masai Mara in lieu of the missed boat ride at Lake Naivasha. OPs received a legal notice on behalf of the complainant and the same was replied by the OPs on 02/08/2019. As such, OPs have prayed for dismissal of the instant consumer complaint.
Ld. Advocate for the parties have advanced the case by adducing relevant evidences and documents. The complainant failed to reply the questionnaire set forth by the OPs and their adversaries and also failed to cross examine the OPs. We have gone through all the evidences and documents on record and gave a thoughtful consideration to the entire fact.
Evidently the complainants along with other members of the Calcutta Club availed services of OPs for travelling South Africa, Kenya and Zimbabwe by paying an amount of Rs.50,000/- each for two . Ld. Advocate for the complainant alleged that OPs had changed the date of travel without taking prior consent of the travelers. On perusal of record it is found that first time the tourists were divided into two groups and the date journey for Group1 was scheduled for 19/03/2018– 03/04/2018 and for the Group2 group was scheduled for 26/03/2018 – 10/04/2018. Ld. Advocate for the OPs argued that they were assured by the Calcutta Club that 60-65 members will go on this tour; but at the end,18 members went and finally the tour was scheduled for 22/03/2018 – 06/04/2018 and final itinerary together with the revised Hotel details was also circulated to the complainants and other group members vide email date 15/02/2018. Photocopies of the Email dated 22/11/2017 issued by the Mr. Anjan Mandal, a member of the Calcutta Club who was coordinating with the OPs and Photocopy of the email dated 15/02/2018 issued by the OPs support this contention.
It is also alleged by the Ld. Advocate for the complainants that consent of the complainants for the subject tour has been taken by misrepresentation and higher rate of ZAR has been charged. Ld. Advocate for the OPs argued that negotiation between the parties commenced in the month of November 2017 and the initial quote was given to them in the month of November 2017 when the existing rate of ZAR was approx. 1 ZAR @ INR 4.50, in the revised itinerary and also in the Booking Form, it has been categorically mentioned that the ZAR rate will be applicable as per prevailing on the date of final payment as per THOMAS COOK Rate of Exchange. Photocopy of the revised itinerary goes to show that:
*Please note that the ZAR rate is taken as 1 ZAR @ INR 4.5 for Calculation purpose. However the exact rate of ZAR as prevailing on the date of final payment will be applicable as per THOMAS COOK Rate of Exchange.
Established fact is that the value of currency is not static, it fluctuates. Therefore, abovementioned submission and declaration of the Ops seemed logical to us.
Allegation made by the complainant that in the itinerary it was mentioned that they would be put up either in Hotel Hilton or Hotel Capatonian. But in Cape Town the complainant along with others was put up at a hotel called Inn-On-The-Square which have massive price and standard difference. Hotel Details in the final and revised schedule reveals that:
3 nights Capetonian Hotel or similar in Cape Town
1 night Four Points by Sheraton Hotel or similar in Nairobi.
Hotel Hiltonwas not mentioned in the revised itinerary issued by the OPs. Difference of the price between the hotels which mentioned in the Complaint Petition by complainants have no material document. Therefore we are not inclined to accept such submission. Complainant failed to furnish single evidence which can prove that Standard of the hotel Inn-On-The-Square was not similar as Hotel Hilton.
Complainants alleged that they have supplied veg-meal in the flights despite they informed OPs that they are non-vegetarian. Moreover they were assured by the OPs that continental food will serve to them during the tour. In this regard OPs submission is that airline authorities serve food in the flights with the help of their caterer as per their own rules and regulations. OPs have no control over them in this regard. We found logic in this submission. On the other hand we found no such commitment in the itinerary of the OPs that continental food will serve to travelers. It is also impossible to determine without any documentary evidence that foods arranged by the OPs at the Indian Restaurant were substandard.
Material on record placed before us shows that in the itinerary it was mentioned that 1 night stay in Johannesburg, instead of that the OPs provided 2 night stay at Sun City to the complainant along with others. It is also observed that sightseeing in Johannesburg is not mentioned in the revised itinerary. Although visit to Lake Naivasha was included in the 1st itinerary issued by the OPs but the same was not included in the revised schedule which circulated to the complainants along with other travelers on 15/02/2018.
It is true that the tour was specially prepared for Calcutta Club Members. OPs include two non-member in this group as Calcutta Club provided only 18 passengers instead of 60 members as per the Email dated 22/11/2017 issued by the Calcutta Club Member Mr. Anjan Mandal to the OPs. In the itinerary it is mentioned regarding cost of the tour that:
The abovementioned quote is valid for minimum 35 people travelling together in one group. If the group strength falls, there will be a change in the cost.
Admitted fact is that despite reduction of group size from 60 members to 18 members who travelled on the tour OPs made no escalation in the tour cost. Under this circumstances if OPs had to combine two of the other group with the group of Calcutta Club members we found no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.
In view of the above discussion we are of the opinion that neither deficiency in service nor unfair trade practice from the end of the OPs are there in the instant Consumer Complaint. Thus, complainants have miserably failed to establish their case.
As such, the complaint case fails.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the case be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OPs without any cost.
