CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel)

New Delhi – 110 016

Case No.413/2005

DR. BAL KRISHAN SHARMA

R/O 313, SHIVALIK AVENUE,

PHASE-1/B, NAYA NANGAL,

THE ANANDPUR SAHIB,

DISTRICT ROPAR

…………. COMPLAINANT                                                                               

                                    VS.

THE PROPRIETOR/DIRECTOR/MANAGING DIRECTOR,

RAJ TRAVELS & TOURS LIMITED,

B-14, CHIRAG ENCLAVE,

NEAR NEHRU PLACE,

NEW DELHI-110048

      …………..RESPONDENT

                                                                                             Date of Order: 15.02.2016

O R D E R

A.S. Yadav – President

The case of the complainants is that he alongwith his family members paid Rs.50,000/- to OP vide receipt dated 23.12.2002 as the booking amount for the tour package to be undertaken in May 2003.  Complainant again paid Rs.1 lakh in April 2003 vide receipt dated 24.04.2003.

OP demanded Rs.50/- for 1$(dollar) while the market price of 1$(dollar) at that time was Rs.47/- thus demanding Rs.25788/-(2149xRs.3x4 persons) more than it should be.  OP also demanded another Rs.12,000/- for Swiss and Schengen Visas which was promised to be included in the cost of package.  OP threatened complainant that if the balance amount was not paid, he would lose the money already paid i.e. Rs.1,50,000/- and at the same time OP refused to part with Passport & Visas of the complainant.  As complainant had already purchased the air tickets, he had no other option left but to pay the balance amount of Rs.2,16,725/-.  Complainant paid total amount of Rs.3,66,725/- and set for voyage alongwith his wife and two sons.  The bus brought for transportation was not in proper condition as the air conditioner and the video TV was not working properly.  It was much inferior as promised at the time of booking and as per brochure provided to complainant.  Driver of the bus continued to smoke incessantly polluting the whole atmosphere of the bus and food served was cold and not of standard quality and due to this complainant and his family members fell ill and could not enjoy the visit of Europe.  Further tour guide/driver did not take the complainant and his family members to the city of Venice.  Non-vegetarian meal was not provided to complainant as promised at the time of booking.

It is further stated that there was deficiency in service on the part of OP as OP has received excess money by charging Rs.12,000/- as visa charges, Rs.25,788/- on account of dollar rate.  Moreover there is deficiency in food service, coach service etc. It is further stated that complainant and his family is entitled to a compensation of Rs.527788/- alongwith Rs.10,000/- as litigation charges alongwith interest @ 18%.

We have heard Ld. Counsel for complainant and carefully perused the record and also gone through the written submission of the parties.

Complainant has alleged that he has and his family were made to sit in an inferior bus even the air conditioner of that bus was not functioning and the driver was smoking continuously.  The food served was cold and stale. The contention of OP is that there were 30 passengers in the bus and none of them have complained about quality of the bus or about the smoking of the driver or about the quality of food.  There is nothing on the record to suggest that complainant has made any complaint to OP or anybody else.  There is nothing on the record to suggest that complainant has made any complaint to law enforcing country regarding smoking by the driver.  The onus is always on the complainant to prove the allegations made in the complaint.  Complainant has miserably failed to prove all what he has alleged regarding quality of the bus, food etc.

So far as charge of Rs.50/- in respect of value of dollar as against Rs.47/-, complainant has not placed anything on record to show that at the relevant time the value of dollar was Rs.47/-.  In fact in the brochure which complainant has placed on record, it was clearly mentioned that registration amount is US dollar 200(Rs.10,000/-) meaning thereby at that time value of dollar was Rs.50/-.  Moreover, nothing prevented complainant to prove at that time about the value of the dollar was Rs.47/- which he has failed to prove.

So far as charging of Rs.12,000/- for Swiss and Schengen Visa is concerned, the contention of OP is that cost of visa was not included in the tour cost as can be seen from the brochure and for that complainant was asked to pay extra amount.  We would like to mention here that complainant has not stated in his complaint which countries were visited by him.  In the brochure it is specifically stated that tour cost includes visa charges (except to USA, Canada, UK and Kenya).  In para 7 of the complaint, complainant has stated that OP demanded Rs.12,000/- for Swiss and Schengen Visas which were promised to be included in the cost of package and the voucher by which payment was made is with complainant.  Complainant has not placed the voucher on record.  However it is stated that when complainant objected to that, OP threatened to forfeit the amount already deposited by complainant.  Complainant should have objected to it at that very moment.  In the absence of voucher on record, it is not clear as for which country the visa amount was charged.  Complainant has not placed on record itinerary of the countries visited by him.  In the absence of itinerary, it is difficult to know as for which country the visa charges were charged.  It is specifically stated that cost of UK visa is not included in the tour cost.

So far as allegation of not visiting the city of Venice due to some law & order problem is concerned, the contention of OP is that they were not able to undertake the tour of Venice due to some law and order problem generated by bomb blast.  The contention of complainant is that driver could have waited till that time the situation was normalized is misfounded.  If something untoward happened while waiting for the situation to subside, the company could not have risked the lives of 30 passengers who were travelling with complainant.  Moreover, company deserves the right to change the itinerary at any time without prior notice.

In fact complainant has failed to prove the allegations made in the complaint, hence complaint is dismissed.

            Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

             (D.R. TAMTA)                                                         (A.S. YADAV)

                 MEMBER                                                               PRESIDENT