BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 26^TH DAY OF JUNE 2024

ORDER

SMT.M.SHOBHA, PRESIDENT

1. The complaint has been filed under Section 35 of C.P.Act (hereinafter referred as an Act) against the OP praying for a direction to the OP to return the money owed to him including the interest on the amount owed along with the indemnity cost for litigation and time, till finalization of the dispute. Further requested to pass such other order/orders as this Hon’ble Commission deems fit.
2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The OPs is Saffire Holidays India Pvt. Ltd., which provide holidays across the globe with more than 100 countries with 4500 + hotels/resorts worldwide and their head office is at Mussoorie.  The complainant has accepted a 25 years old holiday package vide vacation ID NO.CS002023000523 dated 5^th May 2023 in Mussoorie offered by OP at a joining fee of Rs.3,00,000/- with an AMC of Rs.9,999/- each year + GST. During the offer one of the proposal put forth by the marketing team of the OP was to include buyout option (to sell the product any time to the company or the company can arrange a buyer to sell at proportionate prevailing package rate for unutilized portion).

3. On 06.05.2023 a welcome call was made by the OP on a recorded line between the complainant and OP wherein buyout option was again confirmed by their executives.  In this connection the complainant tried to reach out several members of marketing team who all explained and confirm including Mr.Chander Mohan and Mrs.Sania. During his initial whatsapp chat the marketing executive Mrs.Sania has informed that all the above points will be mentioned in the mail as a confirmation but still nothing progressed. Similarly Mr.Chander the Marketing Manager informed in whatsapp chat that sellout option was committed on personal behalf. Thereafter the team stopped responding to the calls, mails, whatsapp messages of the complainant.
4. When the complainant tried to reach the customer care and marketing executive team several times but all the efforts went in vein. Similarly multiple attempts were made to cancel the agreement and refund of the lumpsum amount paid by the complainant and to get a response from the OP. but none of the OP members were neither responded for the emails and also after sending multiple emails. Except one single response has denial to include the condition abruptly. As the promised conditions were not included and several mails sent to cancel the agreement was not responded by the OPs for a significant period the complainant has filed this complaint claiming refund of the amount. Hence this complaint.
5. In response to the notice, OP1 to 4 remained absent and they were placed exparte on 01.02.2024.  The OPs again appeared before this commission through their counsel for the first time on 14.03.2024 with IA1 to permit them to come on record and file their version. This commission has set aside the exparte but rejected the version as it was filed after lapse of 45 days.
6. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and relies on 08 documents. 
7. Heard the arguments of the complainant. Perused the written arguments filed by the OPs.
8. The following points arise for our consideration as are:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

9. Our answers to the above points are as under:

Point No.1:  Affirmative

Point No.2: Affirmative in part

Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

10. Point No.1 AND 2: These two points are inter related and hence they have taken for common discussion.  We have perused the allegations made in the complaint, affidavit evidence of the complainant, written arguments of the OP and documents.  Even though the OPs have appeared before this commission have failed to file their version within 45 days and hence it was rejected. They have filed only the arguments without leading any evidence and without filing any version and hence the written arguments submitted by the OP cannot be considered. The evidence of the complainant and documents remained unchallenged.
11. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and relied on eight documents.
12. It is clear from the evidence and documents of the complainant that the OP is a private limited company which provides holidays across the globe. The OPs have approached the complainant on 05.05.2023 at Mussoorie and they have offered the holiday package.  The complainant impressed by their offer has accepted 25 years holiday package on 05.05.2023 at Mussoorie offered by the OP company and also paid a joining fee of Rs.3,00,000/- with an AMC of Rs.9,999/- each year + GST.  One of the offers put forth by the marketing team of the OP was to include a buyout option.  When the complainant was not satisfied with the services of the OP as they have not included the demands made by the complainant in the agreement has decided to cancel the agreement and he has also claimed refund of the amount paid by him.
13. When the OPs have not responded for his communication from 06.05.2023 till the filing of this complaint, the complainant was forced to file this complaint for recovery of the amount paid by him.  
14. It is clear from the email communications i.e., Ex.P4 and whatsapp chats and also the agreement copy produced by the complainant as per Ex.P1 to P8 it is clear that the complainant has made all efforts to contact the OP either to include the buyout clause in the agreement or to cancel the agreement and for refund of the amount.
15. The OPs have never responded to the complainant after received the entire amount from the complainant.  The complainant has sent message and requested for cancellation of the agreement and also refund of the amount immediately after become the member of the OP within 10 days from the date of his membership.  When the complainant is not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the agreement and also is not at all satisfied with the offer made by the OPs, he has requested to refund the amount.
16. The OPs cannot retain the amount without providing any service to the complainant when he has not at all availed any services and he has disclosed his intention for cancellation of the agreement within a short period of 10 days from the date of membership. Under these circumstances it is the duty of the OPs to refund the amount.  The complainant was forced to approach this commission when the OPs have not available for the contact of the complainant inspite of sending several emails and also reminders and whatsapp messages. Hence the complainant has clearly established the deficiency of service and also unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence the complainant is entitled for the relief.  Hence we answer point No.1 in affirmative and point No.2 partly in affirmative.
17. Point No.3:- In view the discussion referred above we proceed to pass the following;

O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. OPs are directed to refund the booking amount of Rs.3,00,000/- with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of payment till realization to the complainant.
3. OPs are further directed to pay Rs.25,000/- towards compensation with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.
4. The OP shall comply this order within 60 days from this date, failing which the OP shall pay interest at 10% p.a. after expiry of 60 days on Rs.3,00,000/- till final payment.
5. Furnish the copy of this order and return the extra pleadings and documents to the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 26^TH day of JUNE 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;

NIL