Karnataka

Mysore

CC/29/2017

Govindaraju and 5 others - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Go Enjoy Holidays - Opp.Party(s)

YNK

09 Jun 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM MYSURU
No.1542 F, Anikethana Road, C and D Block, J.C.S.T. Layout, Kuvempunagara,
Kuvempunagara, (Behind Jagadamba Petrol Bunk), Mysuru-570023
 
Complaint Case No. CC/29/2017
 
1. Govindaraju and 5 others
1. Govindaraju, S/o B.S.Venkatachar, D.No.2681/A, 19th Cross, 6th Main, V.V.Mohalla, Mysuru.
2. Dasegowda.B.S.
2. Dasegowda.B.S., S/o Late Subbegowda, No.3955, 6th Cross, 20th Main, Vijayanagara 2nd Stage, Mysuru.
3. Vittal Talwar
3. Vittal Talawar, S/o Yamanappa Talawar, No.18, Sri Yalagureshwara Nilaya, 2nd Cross, Opp. Premiere Studio, Vijayashreepura, Mysuru.
4. Pushpa Talawar
4. Pushpa Talawar, W/o Vittal Talawar, No.18, Sri Yalagureshwara Nilaya, 2nd Cross, Opp. Premier Studio, Vijayashreepura, Mysuru.
5. Nagabhushana
5. Nagabhushana, S/o Late Subramanya, No.36/C, N Block, 1st Cross, 3rd Main, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru-23.
6. Radha
6. Radha, W/o Nagabhushana, No.36/C, N Block, 1st Cross, 3rd Main, Kuvempunagara, Mysuru-23.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/s.Go Enjoy Holidays
M/s Go Enjoy Holidays, Rep. by its Proprietor Sri Bhaskar, No.638, Aboe ICICI Bank, Buddha Marg, Siddarthanagar, Mysuru.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. H M Shivakumara Swamy PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MS. M V Bharathi MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Devakumar M.C MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 09 Jun 2017
Final Order / Judgement

 BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.29/2017

DATED ON THIS THE 9th June 2017

 

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

    2) Smt. M.V.Bharathi                    

                                   B.Sc., LLB., -  MEMBER

                     3) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                                          B.E., LLB.,    - MEMBER

 

COMPLAINANT/S

 

:

  1. Govindaraju, S/o B.S.Venkatachar, D.No.2681/A, 19th Cross, 6th Main, V.V.Mohalla, Mysuru.
  2. Dasegowda.B.S., S/o Late Subbegowda, No.3955, 6th Cross, 2nd Main, Vijayanagara 2nd Stage, Mysuru.
  3. Vittal Talawar, S/o Yamanappa Talawar, No.18, Sri Yalagureshwara Nilaya, 2nd Cross, Opp. Premier Studio, Vijayashreepura, Mysuru.
  4. Smt.Puspha Talawar, W/o Vittal Talawar, No.18, Sri Yalagureshwara Nilaya, 2nd Cross, Opp. Premier Studio, Vijayashreepura, Mysuru.
  5. Nagabhushana, S/o Late Subramanya, No.36/C, N Block, 1st Cross, 3rd Main, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru-23.
  6. Radha, W/o Nagabhushana, No.36/C, N Block, 1st Cross, 3rd Main, Kuvempunagara, Mysuru-23.

 

(Sri Yamanurappa N.Kuladari, Adv.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

V/S

 

OPPOSITE PARTY/S

 

:

M/s Go Enjoy Holidays, Rep. by its Proprietor Sri Bhaskar, No.638, Above ICICI Bank, Buddha Marga, Siddarthanagar, Mysuru.

 

(Sri Rajesh.H.M., Adv.)

 

 

Nature of complaint

:

Deficiency in service

Date of filing of complaint

:

11.01.2017

Date of Issue notice

:

19.01.2017

Date of order

:

09.06.2017

Duration of Proceeding

:

4 MONTHS 28 DAYS

        

 

Sri H.M.SHIVAKUMARA SWAMY,

President

 

  1.     This complaint is filed for a direction to opposite party to pay compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- and also to pay Rs.1,40,400/- which the complainants incurred towards expenses with costs.
  2.     The brief facts alleged in the complaint are that the opposite party is running the business of providing holiday packages national and international. The complainants booked holiday package to Singapure for 4 nights and 5 days at the cost of Rs.55,000/- per head.  Opposite party at the time of booking, has assured that the package includes air tickets, airport drop and pick-up, hotel transport, hotel rooms on twin sharing basis, breakfast, lunch, dinner along with other facilities particularly transport facility from Changi International Airport to hotel, night safari tour, overnight stay and other packages as stated in the para 2 of the complaint.  The complainants paid a sum of Rs.3,30,000/- to the opposite party. 
  3.     As per the package schedule, the complainants arrived at Singapur on 16.05.2016, but to their surprise there was nobody to pickup at the airport.  After obtaining new phone connection, called upon the opposite party and inform the prevailing circumstances, but with no results.  Thereby, with no other option, the complainants booked cab at their costs.  This was not the last ordeal that the complainants experienced in the said tour and the few of them are – there is no facility for transport from airport to hotel, no breakfast was offered on 16.05.2016, no lunch, dinner, transport facility not provided to hotel. Singapur City tour was not provided.  Entrance tickets to different places not provided.  Even atlast there is no transport facility from hotel to Airport.  Due to non-coopeartion and non-arrangements of the system, the complainants are suppose to spend Rs.1,40,400/- to get facilities, though the amount was paid to the opposite party.  Hence, this complaint is filed for deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and for compensation.    
  4.     In spite of service of notice, opposite party appeared through his advocate, but not filed any version.  Then this matter is set down for evidence. 
  5.     During evidence, one Vittal Talawar complainant No.3 filed affidavit for himself and on behalf of other complainants and relied on documents.  Further evidence closed.  Written arguments of complainant filed.  After hearing arguments of advocate for complainant, this matter is posted for orders.
  6.     The points arose for our consideration are:-
  1. Whether the complainants establish that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party in not properly arranging the package tour as assured, thereby, the complainants are entitled for the reliefs sought?
  2.  What order?

 

  1.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- Partly in the affirmative.

Point No.2 :- As per final order for the following

 

:: R E A S O N S ::

 

  1.    Point No.1:- During evidence, complainant No.3-Vittal Talawar has given evidence to the effect that this evidence is for and on behalf of other complainants also.  As per his evidence, they have booked holiday package to Singapur for 4 nights and 5 days at the cost of Rs.55,000/- per head.  This cost includes air tickets, air drop and pickup, hotel transport, hotel rooms on twin sharing basis, breakfast, lunch, dinner with other facility like visiting site scene.
  2.    As scheduled on 16.05.2016, all the complainants came to Singapur and to their surprise, there was no pick-up them to hotel at Changi International Airport.  Then with great difficulty, they have contacted the opposite party, but there is no proper response.  Thereby, at their own cost, they started their tour in Singapur, they have to face inconvenience, harassment, during the said tour programme.  Even they have not been provided with entrance facilities for water park, jurong bird park, alive museum SIC, transport facility from hotel to airport.  Thereby, they have spent Rs.1,40,400/- for this, since there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party in not properly arranging the tour and providing expected facilities as agreed.  The complainants submits that they are entitled for compensation and other reliefs.
  3. In view of the evidence given by complainant No.3 and the brochure issued by the opposite party relating to the tour programme, failed to provide all facilities as per the terms of package tour.  The evidence of complainants in the complaint and the absence of any defence on the part of opposite party, this Forum finds that the complainants have established that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party in not properly arranging the tour programme and cause inconvenience to the complainants at a strange place.  Thereby, there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party, for which opposite party has to compensate adequately the complainants.  Hence, Point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative.
  4.  Point No.2:- In view of the findings recorded on point No.1, opposite party is liable to compensate each complainants at the rate of Rs.40,000/- with interest.  Further, opposite party is liable to pay to all the complainants Rs.1,40,400/-  which they have forced to spent in Singapur.   Hence, we pass the following order:-

 

:: O R D E R ::

  1. The complaint is allowed in part.
  2. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay compensation of Rs.40,000/- to each of the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order.  Failing which, the said sum shall carry interest at 18% p.a. from the date of complaint i.e. 11.01.2017 till payment. 
  3. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay in all totally Rs.1,40,400/- to all the complainants within 45 days from the date of this order.  Failing which the said sum of Rs.1,40,400/- shall carry interest at 12% p.a. from the date of complaint i.e. 11.01.2017 till payment.
  4. Complainants are at liberty to share Rs.1,40,400/- + interest if any equally.
  5. In case of default to comply this order, the opposite party to undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
  6. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 9th June 2017)

 

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. H M Shivakumara Swamy]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MS. M V Bharathi]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. Devakumar M.C]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.