Delhi

East Delhi

CC/286/2013

S.D. MAHTO - Complainant(s)

Versus

R.R. TAURS - Opp.Party(s)

06 Oct 2016

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no. -       286 /2013

                                                                                                  Date of Institution      -          25/04/2013

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                06/10 /2016

                                                                                                  Date of Order         -              10/10 /2016  

                                                                                                        

In matter of

 

1-Mr. S D Mehto, Adult   

Govt Boys Sr Sec School, no, 3,

Najafgarh, New Delhi 110043

 

2-Kanhiya Lal

Govt Boys Sr Sec School, no, 3,

Najafgarh, New Delhi 110043

 

3-Satya Pal Sambhariya

Govt Boys Sr Sec School, no, 3,

Najafgarh, New Delhi 110043

 

4-J P S Baranwal

Govt Boys Sr Sec School, no, 3,

Najafgarh, New Delhi 110043

 

5-N P Sharma

Govt Boys Sr Sec School, no, 3,

Najafgarh, New Delhi 110043

 

6-Vinod Kumar Rai

 Govt Boys Sr Sec School, no, 3,

Najafgarh, New Delhi 110043

 

7-S D Mehto

Govt Boys Sr Sec School, no, 3,

Najafgarh, New Delhi 110043………………………….. ..…………….Complainants

 

 

                                                                               VS

 

R R Tours  & Travels

A-30, Gali no. 2,

Madhu Vihar, Nr Hasanpur Depot

I P Extension, Delhi 110092………………………………………………………Opponent

 

Complainant ……………………………………………………..In person

 

Opponent Advocate………………………………………….Ex Parte

 

Quorum                                 Shri Sukhdev Singh                   President

                                                Dr P N Tiwari                              Member

                                                Mrs  Harpreet Kaur                   Member               

 

 Order by   Dr P N Tiwari    Member                        

 

Brief Facts of the case      

                            

This complaint had been filed by Sh S D Mehto along with six others under section 12 of C P Act, 1986 and all working at Govt school in Delhi. Complainant stated that he has filed this complaint for cheating done by OP. It was stated that OP contacted him on 19/03/2012 for a tour from Delhi to Srinagar and back by Air travel. OP assured complainant that four members per family would be provided tour facility, so complainant agreed for the offer and finalized the tour for a sum of Rs 66,000/-for 33 members as per oral contract. So, they paid Rs. 2000/-per member as per detail given below in cash and through cheques as under—

• SBI, Najafgarh branch    Cheque no. 1550446 for Rs 35,000/-
• Canara Bank, Najafgarh  Cheque no. 995152  for Rs 10,000/-

 

• Canara Bank, Najafgarh   Cheque  640225 for Rs 5,000/-
• Cash Rs 16,000/- paid.

Complainant submitted that OP did not provide the Air tickets as the tour was scheduled from 18/05/2012 and so, OP had cheated them. Due to OPs cheating, all family members were in shock and tension. It was also submitted that OP had not deposited cheque of Rs 35,000/- and simultaneously informed SBI Najafgarh on 21/05/2012 not to process the said cheque.    

So, he filed this complaint and claimed refund of Rs 31,000/ with RS 3,30,000/- compensation for harassment and mental agony , claiming a sum of Rs 10,000/- per family members.  

 

Notice was served, but OP did not appear nor submitted written statement or evidences. Number of opportunities were given, but OP did not appear, so case proceded Ex Parte. Complainant filed affidavits of all six persons. Later, OP filed an application for setting aside ex parte order. The application was dismissed after hearing on the ground as per Hon. Supreme Court judgment in Rajeev Hitendra Pathak vs Achuyat Kantinath Kasekar in CA no. 4307 of 2009.

 

No ex-parte evidences were filed by complainant except six other complainant filed their affidavit at evidence stage. For hearing arguments, notices were served, but none appeared, hence order was reserved on merit of the case after perusal of file.    

 

 

After seeing the facts of the case and evidences on record, it was observed that the present case has not been filed by complainant and accompanying affidavit has been signed and notarized by another person.

 

No cash receipt was on record. By going through the passbooks Xerox annexed, showed that two cheques had been deposited by two complainants as Naresh Prasad Sharma for Rs 10,000/- which was debited in the account on 31/03/2012 vide cheque no. 995152. The other passbook details pertains to complainant named SD Mehto for a sum of Rs 5000/-which was also debited on 11/04/2012. Complainant had also annexed Xerox of six receipts showing a sum of Rs 5,000/- each showed that cheques had been received by OP on dated 19/03/2012. But receipts does not mention the reason of receiving the cheques from all these six persons. Complainant had not annexed a withdrawn complainant case no. 425/2012 whose dismissal order copy issued by the Ld District Forum III was on record stating that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint vide Govt notification F50 (47) 96.F&S/CA dt. 20/04/1999, hence, the complaint was dismissed with liberty to file before appropriate jurisdiction.

We come to the conclusion that the 1^st complainant was Mr Raj Kumar and the  present case is under the name of S D Mehto, who is at 7^th complainant list. The present complaint  has  not  been  signed by  S D Mehto,  but  at  evidence  stage, six different   affidavits   were   filed.  In complaint, there  was  no  mention  for other complainants. Also, there were no cash receipts filed on record.

 

 

Complainant had not mentioned about dismissal of their previous complaint nor annexed its copy of complaint for reference. All six receipts zerox does not mention the cause of receiving cheques by OP. At the initial stage of complaint, the complainant had stated that he was cheated by OP, but had not annexed any police report, as they all had paid cash to OP. All the persons, as per memo of the party, were serving in the state Govt school and they had not submitted any school or department’s permission for availing out station tour with their families.

 

So, after scrutinizing all the facts and evidences on record, it has been observed that this complaint has no merit and cheating cases does not come under the pur view of C P Act. In addition to this, complaint is devoid of any merit, so, deserves to be dismissed as complainant could not prove deficiency in the services of OP, where he had informed well in advance that the said tour had been cancelled and was accepted by the complainant and OP had not cashed the cheque of Rs 35,000/- which was issued by complainant. Hence, the complaint is dismissed without cost.  

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the record room.

Mrs –Harpreet Kaur                                                                                  (Dr) P N Tiwari

Member                                                                                                     Member                                                                                    

                                                 Shri Sukhdev Singh

                                                             President