IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
MURSHIDABAD, AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC No. 05/2017.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
14.01.2016 15.02.2016 29.06.2017
Sudipta Das, S/o Jnan Chandra Das,
325, Sutirmath (South),
P.O. & P.S. Berhampore,
District: Murshidabad, Pin: 742 101. ……………… Complainant.
-Vs -
Sanjoy Ghosh,
Deshbandhu Road,
2nd by lane, P.O. & P.S. Madhamgram Bazar,
Kolkata: 700 130. ……............ Opposite Party.
Sri Jagannath Bhattacharyya, Ld. Advocate ………… for the complainant
Present: Anupam Bhattacharyya ……… President.
Chandrima Chakraborty …. .…. Member.
J U D G M E N T
Chandrima Chakraborty, Member.
Filtering out the unnecessary details in the complaint, the Complainant’s case may be summarized thus:-
Cont. ……….…. 2
= 2 =
In epitome, the fact stated in the complaint, is that, the Complainant had booked a tour programme for nine persons to visit Vishakapattanam via Arakuvally for 8 days (on & from 13.10.2016 to 20.10.2016) and accordingly the Complainant paid an advance amount of Rs. 40,000/- only, in total, to the Opposite Party by transferring the amount from the account of the Complainant in favour of the Opposite Party. But the Opposite Party did not provide any relevant documents i.e. tickets or etc. towards the Complainant instead of repeated requests made by the Complainant for which the Complainant had to cancel the said trip and communicated the same over the telephone towards the Opposite Party and thereafter sent a mobile SMS on 28.09.2016 canceling the said trip.
Thereafter the Complainant repeatedly asked for refund of the paid advanced amount of Rs. 40,000/- only from the Opposite Party verbally but the Opposite Party failed to refund the same till to date even did not bother to response what amounts to negligence and deficiency in rendering service by the Opposite Party towards the Complainant for which being victimized and harassed by the Opposite Party the Complainant finding no other alternative than to file the instant case seeking adequate redressal against the Opposite Party.
Despite service of the notice, the Opposite Party never appeared before the Forum himself and/or through their representative/Ld. Advocate to contest the case by filing Written Version and so the instant case has been heard ex-parte against the Opposite Party.
Point for Consideration
The point for determination in the instant case is whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the material evidences on record.
Cont. ……….…. 3
= 3 =
Decision with Reasons
In order to prove his allegation set forth in the complaint, the Complainant deposed in this case as sole witness by way of affidavit and also produced some documents in support of his case.
The main allegation of the complainant are that, in spite of payment of advanced amount, whether the Opposite Party neglected or deficient to provide the services as alleged by the Complainant or not.
On overall evaluation of the argument by the Ld. Advocate of the Complainant and perusing the material documents in record, it is evident that, the Complainant had booked a tour programme for nine persons to visit Vishakapattanam via Arakuvally for 8 days (on & from 13.10.2016 to 20.10.2016) and accordingly the Complainant paid an advance amount of Rs. 40,000/- only, in total, to the Opposite Party by transferring the amount from the account of the Complainant in favour of the Opposite Party which is evident from the photocopies of the documents filed by the Complainant.
But it is revealed from the record that instead of receiving the advance amount from the Complainant the Opposite Party did not provide any relevant documents i.e. tickets, documents of hotel booking and/or etc. towards the Complainant before the date of journey as needed thereto.
The record reveals that due to not providing such relevant and essential documents (travel tickets, hotel booking papers) before the date of journey to the Complainant, the Complainant had no other alternative than to cancel the said prefixed tour programme at last moment wherein the Complainant had already paid the sum of Rs. 40,000/- only in favour of the Opposite Party in advance for such arrangement.
Cont. ……….…. 4
= 4 =
It is evident from the record that after cancellation of the said prefixed tour programme the Complainant repeatedly asked for refund of the paid advanced amount of Rs. 40,000/- only from the Opposite Party verbally and also by sending e-mail which was duly received by the Opposite Party but the Opposite Party did not take any step to refund the said amount towards the Complainant.
Thus, it is deemed to be proved by the Complainant that, the O.P. Tourism already received a sum of Rs. 40,000/- only in total, for making an arrangement for a tour program of Vishakapattanam via Arakuvally for 8 days. But thereafter due to deficient and/or negligent manner of rendering service towards the Complainant by not providing the relevant documents in due time before the journey for which the Complainant had left no other alternative than to cancel the said trip/itinerary and thus became very upset and mentally harassed. Moreover the Complainant further suffered for their financial loss, which they already paid as advance to the O.P. Tourism.
So, it is crystal clear from the discussions made above that the Complainant is successful to prove that, the total itinerary was failed and/or cancelled due to non compliance and for not making any proper arrangement for such itinerary by the Opposite Party Tourism. There is no doubt that every person arrange for an itinerary to travel for his mental pleasure, but in this case the Complainant with his family members suffered a lot for the deficient and negligent act on part of the Opposite Party in rendering service towards the Complainant, by cancelling the said Vishakapattanam via Arakuvally Tour programme.
Moreover, all the allegations made by the Complainant were never challenged by the Opposite Party, even the Opposite Party never appeared to contest the case. Therefore, there are no reasons to disbelieve the unchallenged testimony of the Complainant.
Cont. ……….…. 5
= 5 =
Therefore, the Complainant has successfully proved the case and is entitled to get relief as prayed for, and consequently, the points for consideration are decided in affirmative.
In short, the Complainant deserves success.
In the result, we proceed to pass
O R D E R
That the case be and same is allowed on contest against the Opposite Party with cost of Rs. 5,000/- only payable in favour of the Complainant within one month from the date of this Order.
That the Opposite Party is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 40,000/- only to the Complainant, within one month from the date of this order.
That the Opposite Party is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- only, as compensation to the Complainant for harassment and mental agony, within one month from the date of this order.
In the event of non compliance of any portion of the order by the Opposite Party within a period of one month from the date of this order, the Opposite Party shall have to pay a sum of Rs. 100/- per day, from the date of this order till full satisfaction of the decree, which amount shall be deposited by the Opposite Party in the ‘Consumer Legal Aid Account’.
Let copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
