DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.
CC.No. 570 of 29-11-2011
Decided on 18-07-2012
Doctor Gurmel Singh Mouji, aged about 66 years; son of Sant Singh son of Nand Singh, (Retired S.M.O), resident of # 22999, Surtaal Jail Road, Civil Lines, Bathinda..
........Complainant
Versus
Raj Travel World, Head Office Chowpatty Building, Ground Floor, Opposite Sukh Sagar, S.V.P. Road, Opera House, near Girgaon Chowpatty, Mumbai-400 007, through its Chairman.
Branch Manager, Raj Travel World, 421/423 Devika Tower, Nehru Place, New Delhi, 110019.
.......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.
Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member.
Present:-
For the Complainant: Sh. GS Sodhi, counsel for the complainant.
For Opposite parties: Sh. Sanjdeep Baghla counsel for opposite parties.
ORDER
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has made up his mind to visit European Countries and he saw an advertisement in “ The Daily Times of India” in the month of February and March, 2011. Being allured by the advertisement of opposite parties with words “Genuinely all-inclusive tour cost”, no extras, no sur-charges, no extra airport tax, visas, no optional sight seeing costs, no extra for tips, no extra for travel insurance:-
“No other tour operator can claim this”.- “Most of our tours commence and end in London.-We do not charge deviation charges for change of date. No extra costs for singles etc”, he contacted the opposite parties in the last week of February, 2011. The complainant was allured by the opposite party No.2 and he was contacted many times on telephone as well as through e-mails to see their Website, WWW.raj travel.com. Being allured the complainant deposited initial amount of Rs.25,000/- as demanded (though their registration fee is Rs.10,000/-) he transferred the amount from his saving bank account No.55114266953 of State Bank of Patiala, Civil Lines, Bathinda to their account No.23PP467509144 through R.T.G.S/N.E.F.T (electronically) on 18.3.2011. After getting the initial amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited, the opposite parties sent the Euro discovery tour programs/details with covering letter dated 21.3.2011 bearing words and “all his travel arrangements have been done by us” addressed to British High Commission Visa Counsellor, Chandigarh. After receiving the above mentioned letter the complainant approached the office of the Visa Counsellor of the British High Commission, Chandigarh, through V.F.S Global U.K and the U.K Visa was granted on 14.4.2011 valid up to 13.10.2011 for 180 days. After receiving the abovesaid visa, the complainant was directed by opposite party No.2 to send them the passport of the complainant, required photographs, bank statements, income tax returns, financial security proof, pension payment proof etc. The complainant complied with all the directions given by the opposite party No.2 by sending them all the documents through Blue Dart courier. After receiving the documents the opposite party No.2 prepared the application on behalf of the complainant and completed all the formalities for getting Schengen Visa (Tourist) through V.F.S. CH to the Embassy of Switzerland. The complainant attended the interview conducted by the Embassy of Switzerland at New Delhi on 16.5.2011 as per directions of the opposite parties. After the interview the complainant visited to the office of opposite party No.2, where one Sh. Tej Krishan Ganju was present claiming himself to be a Branch Manager, who assured and asked the complainant to deposit the balance amount totaling Rs.1,65,425/- in advance either through cash or through cheque to him immediately, so that the complainant may take a flight to the European (Euro Discovery) tour on dated 24.5.2011. On reaching Bathinda, the amount in question was immediately transferred to the account of the opposite parties on 18.5.2011 through R.T.G.S/N.E.F.T in the same manner in account No.99506509144 of the opposite parties and from the same account number. The complainant further alleged that the tour programme dated 24.5.2011 was changed suddenly and arbitrarily by the opposite party No.2 and the said tour was fixed to begin on 29.5.2011. The tour of the Paris City fell on 31.5.2011 which was Tuesday and Louvre Museum is closed on that day. The complainant being a Connoisseur of Art wanted to visit Louvre Museum (famous for Mona-lisa and other paintings) as per their advertisement and tour programme dated 24.5.2011. In fact the opposite parties wanted to save the amount of the entrance fee i.e Rs.700/- approximately. The opposite parties as per the Euro discovery tour itinerary skipped the visit to Florence City of Italy which is also a very beautiful place to see and known for its museums and Art Galleries. Although Florence visit is shown included in the newspaper advertisements. On 20.5.2011 the complainant had to book train from Bathinda to Delhi and hotel for stay at Delhi on 28.5.2011 so that the complainant may take the flight in time slated for 29.5.2011 mid day. On 27.5.2011 the complainant was informed through telephone that the tour of the complainant has been cancelled due to the reason that visa has been refused without citing any reason and this information hit the complainant. On 8.6.2011 the opposite party No.2 again demanded a fresh set of papers for filing an other visa application and the complainant obliged them by sending a fresh set of papers on 8.6.2011. On 17.6.2011 the complainant was informed that a fresh visa application has again been sent to the Embassy of Switzerland and the complainant has to appear before the said Embassy on 23.6.2011 personally for the interview and the tour has been fixed from 15.7.2011 to 30.7.2011. The complainant had to book the train from Bathinda to Delhi and back and to make lodging arrangement at Delhi for the interview and also for the travel date i.e. 14.7.2011. The complainant was informed on 21.6.2011 that the interview of the complainant has been cancelled. The complainant requested the opposite parties to return all the documents relating to Visa and Passport and also refund the amount so charged from him. When the complainant did not receive the documents even passing of a week, then the complainant again contacted opposite party No.2. On 28.6.2011 he enquired about the documents and any further chance of the tour for the complainant, but the reply of opposite party No.2 was evasive, and told the complainant orally that there is a very dim chance for the complainant to get on tour with them. He was also told on that day that at least six months are required to clear the visa formalities by filing an appeal before the Government of Switzerland and additional fee of Rs.9,000/- was also demanded from him. The complainant asked for the minute details/ formalities from the opposite parties regarding the visa and appeal but the opposite party No.2 shown his ignorance. The complainant requested again and again to the opposite party No.2 to return all the documents relating to visa and passport and refund of the amount so paid by him. On his repeated requests the opposite party No.2 agreed to return the Passport and other visa related documents to the complainant but refused to refund the amount which is deposited by the complainant in advance. On 5.7.2011 the complainant received passport and some of the documents related to visa, but there was no reference for refund of the advance amount deposited with the opposite parties. After receiving of passport and other documents the complainant made his own arrangement to visit Europe with his own efforts and the complainant had to spend near about thrice the amount as agreed between the complainant and the opposite parties. The Schengen Visa was valid from 2.9.2011 to 2.10.2011, was obtained by the complainant himself within 3 days after making the application for the same that too without appearing for interview. The complainant went on European tour from 2.9.2011 to 2.10.2011. The complainant repeatedly request to the opposite parties to refund his advance money deposited with them approximately to the tune of Rs.2 lacs. He had requested through various modes i.e. Telephone, S.M.S's and E-mails but the opposite parties refused to pay any heed to the request of the complainant. The complainant also sent e-mails dated 7.10.2011 and 31.10.2011. Hence, the complainant has filed this complaint for seeking the direction of this Forum to the opposite parties to refund the amount deposited by the complainant i.e. Rs.1,90,425/- alongwith cost and compensation.
2. The notice was sent to the opposite parties. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum have filed their joint written statement. The opposite parties pleaded that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint. The said complaint is required to be returned for filing before the appropriate forum. As per the brochure the contract and the disputes, if any will be subject to jurisdiction of Mumbai courts only. As no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Forum. The opposite parties pleaded that the complainant booked the said European Discovery tour Canada organized by the opposite parties. The said tour was for 16 Nights/17 days. The tour was inclusive of visit to various countries and cities in western Europe as detailed in the tour itinerary and was subject to the terms and conditions printed in the brochure and the registration form.
The tour cost was inclusive of....
Economy class return airfare
Airport taxes & onetime Visa Charges
Overseas Mediclaim
Tips to eh coach driver
Twin sharing accommodation
Meals as mentioned in the itinerary
Sightseeing as per the itinerary.
The tour cost was Rs.75,000/- plus C2275. The complainant paid booking amount of Rs.25,000/- on 18.3.2011 and booked the said tour. Immediately on 21.3.2011, opposite parties issued a letter to enable the complainant to apply to British High Commission for grant of U.K visa. On 13.4.2011 the complainant was granted U.K Visa. After getting the U.K Visa, on 26.4.2011 the opposite parties applied to Swiss Embassy for grant of Schenegen visa. However after the personal interview of the complaint, the visa application of the complainant was rejected by Swiss Embassy on 26.5.2010 as the justification for the purpose and condition of the intended stay of the complainant was not found to be reliable. Since the said decision was appealable the complainant was advised to apply second time for the visa with concrete documents. However, the second time also the said visa to the complainant was rejected by the Swiss Embassy. The opposite parties pleaded that the grant of the visa is the sole discretion of the respective embassy/consultates and opposite parties have no role to play in it. The opposite parties on the request of the complainant cancelled the said tour and the refund the amount paid by the complaint. The opposite parties informed the complainant that a sum of Rs.1,63,727/- would be refunded to the complainant, after deducting Rs.26,726/- spent by the opposite parties as detailed under:-
U.K Visa Fee Rs.5900/-
Swiss Visa Fee Rs.9326( 2 time visa fee)
Insurance Charges Rs.1500/-
Non refundable Regn.Amt. Rs.10,000/-
The opposite parties further pleaded that they are always ready and willing to refund the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,63,727/- to the complainant, however could not pay the same during August to October, 2011 due to financial crunch and pending litigations. But thereafter the complainant refused to accept the said amount and demanded full refund with 24 % interest. The complainant instead of accepting the actual amount of refund due to him, the complainant chose to file the present complaint making exaggerated and baseless claims and seeking amount which is not due to him. The opposite parties further pleaded that the visa application alongwith other documents supplied by the complainant were submitted to the Swiss embassy for getting the Schengen Visa for the Europe tour. The planned date of travel was on 24.5.2011. After successfully getting U.K visa, the chances of rejection of European visas are very less, hence complainant was asked to deposit balance amount. The complainant could not travel on the said tour as his Schengen Visa was refused by Swiss Embassy twice. The visa of the complainant was rejected by Swiss Embassy for the second time, the complainant could not participate in the tour organized by opposite parties. Hence his original passport was returned to him. The act of complainant obliging the opposite parties by submitting his own documents second time for visa reflects the dishonest and arrogant attitude of the complainant. The opposite parties further pleaded that they have separate and dedicated visa department at its head office and question of the opposite parties knowing complete and minute details of visa procedure does not arise at all. The opposite parties further pleaded that they were not aware and are not concerned as to why and how the Italian Embassy granted visa to the complainant for 30 days as one can approach Italian embassy for visa only if one is travelling directly to Italy. The complainant booked returned journey ticket from New Delhi to Rome and from Rome to New Delhi by China Airlines to apply for and secure Italian Visa. In any event the opposite parties is not concerned with the individual travel plan of the complainant or its costing. The opposite parties are always ready to refund the amount after deducting the amount of Rs.26,726/- spent by the opposite parties, the complainant was adamant and was asking for the amount of Rs.2 lacs with interest.
3. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.
4. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.
5. Admitted facts of the parties are that the complainant had booked an European tour with the opposite parties and has deposited the initial amount of Rs.25000/- on 18.3.2011 in the bank account bearing No. 23PP467509144 and also paid the amount of Rs.1,65,425/- to the opposite parties on 18.5.2011. On 13.4.2011 the U.K visa was granted to the complainant. Thereafter, he applied for Schengen Visa to Swiss Embassy on dated 26.4.2011 which was rejected by the Swiss Embassy on 26.5.2011. The complainant was asked to apply for Schengen Visa again. The tour that was fixed on 29.5.2011 was also cancelled. On the demand of the complainant the passport and other visa related documents were returned to the complainant but amount so deposited was not refund to the complainant.
6. The disputed facts amongst the parties are that after depositing the payment of Rs.25000/-, one Sh. Tej Krishan Ganju, Branch Manager asked the complainant to deposit the balance amount of Rs.1,65,425/- in advance, so that the complainant take a flight to European tour on 24.5.2011. The complainant transferred the said amount in the account of opposite parties on 18.5.2011 in their account but the tour programme dated 24.5.2011 was changed suddenly by the opposite party No.2 and the same was fixed on 29.5.2011. In this tour Paris City fell on 31.5.2011 i.e. Tuesday and Louvre Museum is closed on that day. The complainant being a Connoisseur of Art wanted to visit Louvre Museum (famous for the painting of Mona-lisa and other paintings). The opposite parties also skipped the visit to Florence City of Italy which is also a very beautiful place to see and known for its museums and Art Galleries, all these places were mentioned in the advertisement. The complainant had booked train on 20.5.2011 from Bathinda to Delhi and hotel for stay at Delhi on 28.5.2011 so that the complainant may take the flight for European countries on 29.5.2011, but on 27.5.2011 he was informed that the tour was cancelled. The opposite parties again asked the complainant to apply for fresh visa. On 8.6.2011 the complainant has sent application alongwith all requisite papers. On 17.6.2011 the complainant was informed that his fresh visa application has again been sent to the Embassy of Switzerland and the complainant has to appear in interview on 23.6.2011 and the tour has been fixed from 15.7.2011 to 30.7.2011. The complainant was informed on 21.6.2011 that his interview has been cancelled and all the documents relating to Visa and Passport were being returned to the complainant. When the complainant did not receive the documents even after passing a week, the complainant contacted the opposite party No.2. On 28.6.2011 he enquired about the documents and any further chance of the tour for the complainant, but the reply was negative. He was also informed that at least six months are required to clear the visa formalities by filing an appeal before the Government of Switzerland and additional fee of Rs.9,000/- was also demanded from him. He also demanded the refund of the amount so deposited by him but the opposite parties have not refunded the amount rather they have given a detail of the expenditures incurred by them for getting the visa for the complainant. The detail is as under:-
1. U.K Visa Fee Rs.5900/-
2. Swiss Visa Fee Rs.9326( 2 time visa fee)
3. Insurance Charges Rs.1500/-
4. Non refundable Regn.Amt. Rs.10,000/-
The opposite parties have admitted that they have taken the amount of Rs.1,90,425/- and they are ready to refund the amount of Rs.1,63,727/- to the complainant after deducting the amount of Rs.26,726/- from the amount so deposited by the complainant and they also mentioned in their reply in Para No.3.8 that they are willing to refund the amount but cannot refund the same during August-October, 2011 due to financial crunch and pending litigations.
7. The complainant submitted that he was allured by an advertisement in “ The Daily Times of India”. The advertisement was regarding the visit to European countries. The complainant approached the opposite party No.2 and visited their Website, WWW.raj travel.com. He has also deposited the initial amount of Rs.25,000/- as demanded, this amount was transferred by the complainant on 18.3.2011 from his saving bank account No.55114266953 of State Bank of Patiala, Civil Lines, Bathinda to their account No.23PP467509144 through R.T.G.S/N.E.F.T (electronically) on 18.3.2011. The opposite parties sent the Euro discovery tour programs/details with covering letter dated 21.3.2011. It was mentioned that “all arrangements have been done by the opposite parties” addressed to British High Commission Visa Counsellor, Chandigarh. After receiving this letter the complainant approached the office of the Visa Counsellor of the British High Commission, Chandigarh, through V.F.S Global U.K And the U.K Visa was granted on 14.4.2011 valid up to 13.10.2011 for 180 days. After receiving the visa, the complainant was asked by opposite party No.2 to send them his passport, required photographs, bank statements, income tax returns , financial security proof and pension payment proof etc. The complainant sent all these documents through Blue Dart courier. After receiving the documents the opposite party No.2 prepared an application on behalf of the complainant and completed all the formalities on behalf of the complainant for getting Schengen Visa (Tourist) through V.F.S. CH to the Embassy of Switzerland. The complainant attended the interview conducted by the Embassy of Switzerland at New Delhi on 16.5.2011. After the interview the complainant visited the office of opposite party No.2, there he met Sh. Tej Krishan Ganju Branch Manager, who assured the complainant about the visa and asked him to deposit the balance amount of Rs.1,65,425/- in advance. So that the complainant may take a flight to the European tour on 24.5.2011. After reaching Bathinda, the complainant immediately transferred the amount in the account of the opposite parties on 18.5.2011 through R.T.G.S/N.E.F.T in the same manner as he transferred the previous amount. The tour programme dated 24.5.2011 was changed suddenly by the opposite party No.2 and the said tour was fixed to begin on 29.5.2011. The tour of the Paris City fell on 31.5.2011 i.e. Tuesday and Louvre Museum is closed on that day. The complainant being a Connoisseur of Art wanted to visit Louvre Museum (famous for the painting of Mona-lisa) as per their advertisement and tour programme dated 24.5.2011. In fact the opposite parties wanted to save the amount of Rs.700/- of entrance fee. The opposite parties as per the Euro discovery tour itinerary skipped the visit to Florence City of Italy which is also a very beautiful place to see and known for its museums and Art Galleries. On 20.5.2011 the complainant had to book train from Bathinda to Delhi and hotel for stay at Delhi on 28.5.2011 so that the complainant could take the flight on 29.5.2011. On 27.5.2011 the complainant was informed that the tour has been cancelled due to the reason that visa has been refused without citing any reason. Thereafter, on 8.6.2011 the opposite party No.2 again demanded a fresh set of papers for filing an other visa application and the complainant obliged them by sending a fresh set of papers on 8.6.2011. The opposite parties informed the complainant on 17.6.2011 that a fresh visa application has again been sent to the Embassy of Switzerland and the complainant has to appear before the said Embassy on 23.6.2011 for the interview and the tour has been fixed from 15.7.2011 to 30.7.2011. On 21.6.2011 the complainant was informed that the interview has been cancelled and all the documents relating to Visa and Passport were being returned to the complainant. The complainant was further informed that at least six months are required to clear the visa formalities by filing an appeal before the Government of Switzerland and additional fee of Rs.9,000/-. The complainant asked for the minute details/ formalities to be done by the opposite parties for the visa but the opposite parties were unable to clarify those details and formalities. On the repeated requests of the complainant the opposite parties agreed to return the Passport and other visa related documents to the complainant but refused to refund the amount which is deposited by the complainant in advance. On 5.7.2011 the complainant received passport and some of the documents related to visa, but there was no reference for refund of the amount paid by the complainant. The complainant himself made the arrangement to visit Europe and had to spend near about thrice the amount as agreed between the complainant and the opposite parties. The Schengen Visa was issued to complainant for one month i.e. from 2.9.2011 to 2.10.2011 within 3 days after giving the application for the same and that without appearing for interview. The complainant went on European tour from 2.9.2011 to 2.10.2011. But till date the opposite parties have not returned the amount deposited by the complainant for European tour.
8. A perusal of record placed on file shows that the complainant had deposited Rs.25,000/- plus Rs.1,65,425/- , in total he has deposited the amount of Rs.1,90,425/-. The schengen visa of the complainant was rejected twice as per the version of the opposite parties. But according to the complainant his visa was rejected only once. The opposite parties are ready to refund the amount of Rs.1,63,727/- but after deducting the amount of U.K Visa Fee Rs.5900/-, Swiss Visa Fee Rs.9326 (2 times visa fee), Insurance Charges Rs.1,500/-, Non refundable amount Rs.10,000/- = Rs.26,726/-. Meaning thereby the opposite parties are ready to refund the amount of Rs.1,63,727/- after deducting the amount of Rs.26,726/- to the complainant. The complainant has repeatedly requested to refund the said amount as the opposite parties have failed to get visa for the complainant but despite his repeated request, the opposite parties have never tried to refund the amount rather mentioned in their reply as well as affidavit that they are ready to refund the amount but during the period of August to October, 2011 they cannot refund this amount due to financial crunch and pending litigations. The opposite parties are admitting their liabilities to refund the amount but subject to few deduction as mentioned above. The record placed on file also shows that U.K Visa was granted to the complainant on 14.4.2011 valid up to 13.10.2011 for 180 days but Schengen Visa was rejected without citing any reason by the Embassy. The opposite parties have given the detail of Swiss Visa fee as Rs.9326/-(2 times visa fee). Once the Swiss Visa was rejected but second time whether the opposite parties have applied for the visa or not, there are no such evidence on the file. The opposite parties are deducting Rs.1500/- for Insurance Charges and Non Refundable Amount Rs.10,000/-. No detail of non refundable amount has been given by the opposite parties that on what pretext this amount is to be deducted. The opposite parties are deducting the amount of Rs.10,000/- plus Rs.4663/-(swiss visa fee for 2nd time) but has not provided any sufficient reason and proof for these deductions.
9. Keeping in view the facts, circumstances and evidence placed on file, it has been proved that the amount of Rs.1,90,425/- was deposited by the complainant for seeking the tourist visa to European countries but his Schengen Visa was rejected. And tour was delayed from its previous schedule. At the most the opposite parties can deduct the amount of Rs.5900/- i.e. for U.K Visa plus Rs.4,663/- of Swiss Visa (once rejected and has no record of second time rejection) and Rs.1500/- of insurance=Rs.12,063/-. The opposite parties are liable to deduct the amount of Rs.12,063/- only from the amount of Rs.1,90,425/-. The plea of the opposite parties are that the amount cannot be refunded from August to October, 2011 is not tenable as the opposite parties cannot retain the amount of the complainant on any pretext, moreover they have used the amount of the complainant for their business purpose, complainant is also entitled to get interest on that amount.
10. The opposite parties argued that this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint as no cause of action has arisen in the territorial jurisdiction of Bathinda. A perusal of record placed on file reveals that the payment has been made twice from Bathinda through RTGS/NEFT from the saving account of the complainant bearing No.55114266953 of State Bank of Patiala, Civil Lines Bathinda to the account of opposite parties bearing No.99506509144. Hence, this Forum has the territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint. The objection of the opposite parties is not tenable.
11. Therefore, in view of what has been discussed above, this complaint is accepted with Rs.20,000/- as cost and compensation against the opposite parties and the opposite parties are directed to refund the amount Rs.1,78,362(i.e Rs.1,90,425-Rs.12,063=Rs.1,78,362/-) alongwith 9 % interest since 5.7.2011 till realization. The compliance of this order be done jointly and severally by the opposite parties within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
12. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced in open Forum:-
18-07-2012 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)
President
(Amarjeet Paul)
Member
