Haryana

Panchkula

CC/31/2015

LT.COL.KVS HARI KUMAR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

MY TOUR MY TRAVEL. - Opp.Party(s)

NIKHIL SHARMA.

12 Aug 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,  PANCHKULA.                                                            

Consumer Complaint No	:	31 of 2015
Date of Institution	:	10.02.2015
Date of Decision	:	12.08.2015

                                                                                          

Lt. Col. KVS Hari Kumar, s/o Sh.KV Subbarao, R/o Flat No.204, GH-18, Sector-15, MDC, Panchkula.

                                                                                          ….Complainant

Versus

 

My Tour My Travel, 1/531 Vikaspuri, Opposite Metro Pillar No.623, New Delhi through its Proprietor Sh.Devender Tyagi.

                                                                                        ….Opposite Party

COMPLAINT UNDER SEC. 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.

 

Quorum:               Mr.Dharam Pal, President.

Mrs.Anita Kapoor, Member.

 

For the Parties:     Ms.Bhavna Joshi, Adv., for the complainant. 

Op already ex-parte.

ORDER

(Anita Kapoor, Member)

1. The complainant-Lt. Col. KVS Hari Kumar has filed this complaint against the opposite party (in short the Op) with the averments that he had planned a visit to Shri Amarnath Shrine alongwith his friends and family members. On 16.01.2014, upon browsing various websites on the internet, the complainant came across an advertisement floated by the Op wherein it offered attractive packages. The complainant told the Op that he would visit the Amarnath Shrine in the first week of July, 2014 and expressed his requirement for booking five rooms for three nights at two different places i.e. Baltal & Srinagar and the helicopter ticket for traveling to and fro Srinagar for ten people (5 couples). After inquired for the price quotation for trip for 10 persons, the complainant gave their program (Annexure C-1) as under:-

“Day 1 (3^rd July 2014) Arrival into Srinagar & Drive to Baltal and night stay at Baltal.

Day 2 (4^th July 2014) visit Amarnah Shrine via helicopter and return back to Srinagar.

Day 3 (5^th July 2014) reserve day. If possible visit to Gulmarg and night stay at Srinagar.

Day 4 (6^th July 2014) Departure from Srinagar Airport.”

It was also made clear that the requirement is for 5 rooms for 10 persons for 3 nights (Annexure C-1). On 19.01.2014, the OP made an offer (Annexure C-2) wherein the Op told that total cost per person for the entire four days package was Rs.9,999/- and the package included accommodation in hotel/houseboat, Yatra registration pass on high priority basis, transfer in non-AC vehicle, confirmed helicopter tickets, meals in bhandaras/lanngars and breakfast in hotel, sightseeing of Sonmarg (Srinagar) and all taxes. As per quotation offered for the first day, the package included transfers by non AC vehicle from Srinagar to Sonmarg/Baltal and checking into Swiss tent and overnight stay at Baltal/Sonmarg. For the second day, the schedule included boarding to helicopter from Baltal to Panchtarni cave and thereafter returned from Panchtarni cave to Baltal by helicopter in the evening and returned to Srinagar in the evening and overnight stay in Srinagar in Hotel/Houseboat. On third day, the schedule was for free sightseeing of Srinagar City and stay in the same hotel. On 4^th day, the schedule was transfer from hotel to airport, Srinagar (Annexure C-2). The complainant telephonically talked with the representative of the Op namely Rameez Ashraf and he confirmed the package tour for 14 person @ Rs.9,999/- each and also for advance payment of 50% made by the complainant. The complainant accepted the offer requested him to provide the bank detail so as to make the advance payment (Annexure C-3). The complainant made a payment of Rs.70,000/- towards 50% through cheque drawn from HDFC Bank and also intimated the Op vide email dated 25.01.2014 (Annexure C-5). On 29.01.2014, the Op sent a confirmation of the package tour with general guidelines and reiterated the itinerary vide email dated 29.01.2014 (Annexure C-6). The OP also stated that the helicopter tickets would be getting 5-7 days prior to the date of arrival. After receiving 50% payment of total amount, the Op informed the complainant that it would be providing accommodation on triple sharing basis and that cost for double sharing basis would be a slight change in the cost per person. The complainant left with no other option, he inquired for cost of accommodation on double sharing basis vide email dated 03.02.2014 (Annexure C-7). The complainant inquired also for the package for 12 persons instead of 14 persons and the Op informed that cost per person on double sharing basis would be Rs.11,200/- and for 12 persons, the total cost would be Rs.1,34,400/- vide email dated 05.02.2014. Thereafter, the complainant telephonically informed the Op that he required 6 rooms in all i.e. 4 rooms on double sharing and 2 rooms on triple sharing basis for 14 persons and not for 12 (Annexure C-9). The complainant also sent identity proofs and photographs of all 14 persons. On 13.06.2014, the complainant confirmed the package details and the cost of Rs.79,000/- vide email dated 13.06.2014 (Annexure C-10). On 13.06.2014, the Op informed the complainant that the cost per person was Rs.11,600/- and total cost for 14 persons would be Rs.1,62,400/- after deducting the amount of Rs.70,000/- made in advance whether the rooms were on double sharing and triple sharing (Annexure C-11). Thereafter, the Op confirmed that the cost per person was Rs.11,200/- instead of Rs.11,600/- vide email dated 17.06.2014 (Annexure C-12). As per assurance given by the Op, the complainants had to receive the tickets and the hotel vouchers 5-7 days prior to the journey. On 26.06.2014, the complainant requested for the tickets, vouchers and final tour programme and was informed that the tickets would be sent on 01.04.2014 alongwith hotel vouchers. Thereafter, the Op again pressurized the complainant to make the balance amount of Rs.86,800/- instead of Rs.79,600 as stated earlier. Since, the complainant had already paid a huge amount and the schedule date of the trip was two days after i.e. on 03.07.2014, therefore, the complainant was left with no other options but to make the payment as demanded by the Op. After making the payment, the OP sent only 7 helicopter tickets (Annexure C-15) and also promised to give remaining 7 tickets on arrival at Srinagar. Upon reaching Baltal, the complainant was given only 5 more helicopter tickets and the Op informed the complainant that the remaining tickets could not be arranged and the remaining two persons would have to go on their own. The complainant telephonically talked with the Op that he could not leave one couple alone. On that, the Op told that he is helpless and could not arrange 2 more tickets, therefore, they should have to go on a pony/mule. The Op promised the complainant that he would bear the cost of pony ride in order to compensate the complainant for the inconvenience caused on account of mismanagement. Consequently, the complainant was forced to get all the tickets cancelled and the Op promised to refund the cost for helicopter tickets. As per terms and conditions of the helicopter company, the full amount would be refunded if the flight was cancelled due to bad weather. The Op through its agent at Baltal requested the representative of the helicopter company and arranged for cancellation of the tickets owing to bad weather. The complainant was informed by the Op that the cancellation amount would be refunded to OP’s account by the Company and the same would be refunded to him upon his return. As per the terms and conditions for boarding flight through Global Vectra Helicorp Ltd, the refund for payments done through credit cards or other online banking would be credited back to the card holder’s account or online account from which the payment was received (Annexure C-17). Due to mismanagement on the part of Op and dereliction on account of non-providing of helicopter tickets, the complainant and his guests could not travel to Sri Amarnath Shrine on 04.07.2014 because of absence of road permit. The complainant requested the OP to make arrangements for the road permit as it had failed to provide 14 air tickets but the Op refused to arrange the same and the complainant had to stay at Sonemarg/Baltal and arrange for the same. The complainant had to spend Rs.11,250/- for stay in a hotel at Sonemarg. The complainant managed to get the road permit and travelled on 05.07.2014 to Sri Amarnath Shrine by pony from which the complainant had to spend Rs.56,000/- for pony ride to and from Amarnath. The Op promised the complainant that a non AC vehicle facility would be provided to the complainant for travel but the cab provided by the OP’s agent i.e. Sana Travels and charged Rs.8300/-. On returning, the complainant sent the return air tickets to the OP and requested through phones & emails for refund the amount of air tickets but to no avail. The complainant sent a legal notice dated 19.08.2014 but the Op refused to refund the amount in its reply dated 02.09.2014. This act and conduct of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service on its part. Hence, this complaint.

2. Notice was issued to the Op through registered post but none has appeared on behalf of the Op. However, counsel for the complainant filed an application for issuing notice to the Op through publication in the newspapers i.e. Mail Today and Nav Bharat Times which was allowed. Notice was issued to the OP through publication but none has appeared on behalf of the Op. Despite passing 30 days, it is deemed to be served. The Op was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 22.06.2015.
3. The complainant has tendered the evidence by way of affidavit Annexure C-A alongwith documents Annexure C-1 to C-23 and closed the evidence.
4. We have heard the counsel for the complainant and have also perused the record.
5. The averments made by the complainant draw implicit sustenance from the documentation exchanged between him and the OP in the matter of the impugned transaction whereby the OP had agreed to provide the requisite services (travel arrangement, hotel stay and the like) to the complainant and as many as 13 (in all fourteen) members of his party which wanted the arrangements to be made to facilitate their Amarnath Yatra. A perusal of Annexure C-1 to C-4 would indicate the factual accuracy of the averments made by the complainant.
6. Further, the perusal of Annexure C-5 onwards would prove the correctness of the averments by the complainant that the OP did not arrange air tickets for the group and also did not arrange the road permit for journey by road. If the group was to undertake journey by road, they had to necessarily obtain the road permit. If the booking of air tickets was not feasible for whatever reasons, it was incumbent upon the OP to arrange road permit for the journey being undertaken by the group including the complainant. The grievance with regard to the non-booking of air tickets would be adjudicated upon independently. As the OP neither arranged the contracted air tickets nor obtained the road permit, the complainant had to incur expenditure for the obtaining of the latter authorisation.
7. From the documents, it is proved that the complainant had paid extra Rs.16,800/- on account of enhanced cost of package i.e. for accommodation, Rs.54,600/- for the cancelled tickets and also failed to hand over the tickets for which the Op charged/received amount, Rs.8,300/- spent by the complainant on account of taxi/cab expenses and Rs.22,500/- for stay at hotel Sonemarg for two days.
8. The amount paid by the group for the pony and the cab ride too cannot be reimbursed by the OP because the complainant failed to produce any document in support of his contention that he paid an amount of Rs.5600/- towards the expenditure incurred on pony ride.
9. Apart from the issuance of a notice to the OP by registered post, a public notice in a newspaper too was published on the plea of the complainant. However, none entered appearance on behalf of the OP to contest the averments made in the course of the complaint.
10. We, in acceptance of the correctness of the averments made in the course of the complaint, allow the complaint and direct the Op as under: -

(i)      To pay an amount of Rs.16,800/- on account of enhanced cost of package i.e. for accommodation, Rs.54,600 for cancellation of tickets, Rs.8,300/- spent by the complainant on account of taxi/cab expenses and Rs.22,500/- for stay at hotel.

(ii)     To pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony, harassment.

(iii)    To pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation.

OP shall comply with this order within a period of one month from the date its communication to it comes about. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

ANNOUNCED

12.08.2015                     ANITA KAPOOR                            DHARAM PAL

                                       MEMBER                               PRESIDENT

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

                                          

 

                                                         ANITA KAPOOR

                                                          MEMBER