IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Wednesday the 30th day of September, 2015
Filed on 03.06.2013
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
C.C.No.173/2013
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri. Prasad 1. Princy World Travels
Velinthara, Muhamma Post Box No.56, Power House
Panchayath, Charamangalam Road, Near Iron Bridge
Village, Cherthala Taluk Cherthala – 688 524
Puthanangad, Muhamma P.O. Represented by its Manger
Alappuzha
(By Adv. V.S. Ullasanadhan) 2. Sri. Paul, Manager
Princy World Travels
Post Box ZNo.56, Power House
Road, Near Iron Bridge
Cherthala – 688 524
(By Adv. P.K. Mathew – for
Opposite parties 1 and 2)
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant is working in abroad for a period of 10 years. He is working as Salesman in a Hyper Market at Riyadh. On April 2012, the complainant was on leave and reached his native land from abroad. On the expiry of leave of the complainant he has to return to abroad and to join his job. The complainant approached the opposite parties for getting an Air ticket to Riyadh. The opposite parties issued the complainant an air ticket dated 6.10.2012 of Gulf Air Ways form Cochin to Bahrain, and from Bahrain to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. On 6.10.2012 before the departure of the Aircraft, the complainant reached the Airport at Nedumbassery. The complainant approached the Gulf Air Ways officers for getting a boarding pass before the emigration the Gulf Airways officers have to take the transaction of the VISA they took the translation of the complainant’s VISA and told the complainant that the complainant’s VISA had expired on 5.10.2012. Therefore, the complainant could not go to Riyadh and was not able to join his job after the expiry of his leave. Therefore the complainant lost his job. The opposite parties without taking the translation of the VISA of the complainant and without knowing the expiry date of VISA issued Air ticket to the complainant and that amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The said act on the part of opposite parties caused to loss the job of the complainant. Hence the complaint is filed.
2. The version of the opposite parties is as follows:-
It is true that an Air ticket is issued to the petitioner for taking board on 6.10.2012. The date of journey is decided by him and not me as he alone can decide it. VISA is a private document between the parties in the VISA itself. It is a document executed by a foreign country in favour of an individual. So the allegation that there is a mandatory due cast upon the Ticket seller to verify the VISA and the opposite parties failed to do it which resulted injury is false. Now a days every thing is available in system and is in the fingertip and no translation is required and we have the facility in our office itself. So there is no question of any translation. There is no deficiency in service on their part.
3. The power of attorney holder was examined as PW1. The documents produced marked as Exts.A1 to A7. The second opposite party was examination as RW1.
4. The points came up for considerations are:-
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
- If so the reliefs and costs?
5. It is an admitted fact that opposite parties had issued an Air ticket to the complainant dated 6.10.2012 of Gulf Air Ways from Cochin to Bahrain and from Bahrain to Riyadh. According to the complainant, when he approached the Gulf Air Ways officers for getting a boarding pass before the emigration, the Gulf Air Ways officers take the translation of the VISA and told the complainant that the complainant’s VISA had expired on 5.10.2012. The complainant again alleged that it is the bounden duty of the opposite party to take the translation of VISA, and to know the expiry date of the VISA and to make the Air Ticket available to the passenger within the expiry date of the VISA. But the opposite parties totally denied this allegation. It is true that VISA is a private document executed by a foreign country in favour of an individual. The duty of the opposite party is to arrange ticket to the complainant. Since the ticket was booked by the complainant the responsibility of ensuring the requirement of travel documents like VISA lies with the complainant and not with the travel agent. It is also the responsibility of the complainant to make sure about the validity of VISA. In the instant case complainant has no case that he has entrusted the VISA with the opposite parties. Since there is no obligation lies with the opposite parties to verify the VISA before issuing ticket to the complainant, we are unable to find defect and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of September, 2015
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Shiji Prasad (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Special power of attorney
Ext.A2 - Receipt dated 10.9.2011
Ext.A3 - Copy of the Air ticket
Ext.A4 - Photo copy of the passport
Ext.A5 - Photo copy of the exit and re-entry visa
Ext.A6 - Submission for Visa endorsement
Ext.A7 - Photo copy of Acoma
Ext.A8 - Copy of the Visa expiry note
Evidence of the opposite parties:-
RW1 - Paul Isaac. N. (Witness)
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
