1. Gopinath Mandal,

            FH-VII, Room No.221, Field Hostel Township,

            NTPC Ltd. (A Govt. of India Enterprise),

            Farakka STPS, Dist. Murshidabad-742236,

            West Bengal.

1. Debraj Pal,

            FH-VII, Room No.281, Field Hostel Township,

            NTPC Ltd. (A Govt. of India Enterprise),

            Farakka STPS, Dist. Murshidabad-742236,

            West Bengal.                                                                                                           _________ Complainants

____Versus____

1. SOTC Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd.

            Head Office, 8^th Floor, Urmi Estate,

            95, Ganpatrao Kadam Road, Lower Parel,

            Mumbai – 400013.

1. SOTC Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd.

Kolkata Branch Office, 10, Wood Street,

2^nd Floor, Room No.10 & 11, Near Pantaloon

Showroom, Camac Street, P.S. Park Street,

Kolkata, West Bengal-700016.                                                               ________ Opposite Parties

Present :           Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.

                        Smt.  Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member

Order No.   16    Dated   15/01/2015.

          The case of the complainant in short is that complainants booked a tour programme from o.p. no.2 for an escorted tour to Europe (covering UK, France, Italy, Switzerland and Germany) in the year 2010. Complainants paid an advance amount of Rs.21,000/- for each for two tickets amounting to Rs.42,000/-. Complainants were asked to submit all types of necessary documents like passport, photographs, NOC from employer, bank statement, leave permission etc. Both the complainants accordingly submitted those documents at the office of o.p. no.2. O.p. no.2 intimated the complainants that they would be called for UK Visa interview, to be held at VFS global office (facilitator of UK Visa). After some days complainants received a call from o.p. no.2 intimating about the visa interview in the next week. Accordingly, complainants visited the office of o.p. no.2. Then o.p. no.2 took them to VFS office at Kolkata escorted by one employee of o.p. no.2 who was carrying all the required documents for the visa approval in a sealed envelop. It was not discussed what was filled up in the visa application form. After giving the successful interview complainants started planning for Europe tour. As per terms of o.ps., complainants had to pay balance amount of Rs.1 lakh for each person after approval of visa and before the actual journey. Then all on a sudden complainants received a call from o.p. no.2 that UK Visa of complainants had been rejected. The reason of the rejection was not clear to the complainants. Complainants stated in their petition of complaint following the visa refusing letter that o.p. no.2 is only responsible for visa rejection and o.p. no.2 had done this intentionally to invoke the advance amount which was paid by complainants. Complainants asked for the cash refund of the amount but o.p. no.2 had denied. O.p. no.2 had stated that the advance amount has been absorbed as cancellation charges of hotel booking and flight booking. Then complainants said that they would bear the cancellation charges provided o.p. no.2 would give the copy of documentary evidence of the cancellation charge. But o.p. no.2 failed to produce any documentary evidence. After a lot of negotiation o.p. no.2 finally agreed to refund of Rs.8720/- per head and not by cash refund but as credit against the account of complainants for future journey. Then complainants sought for the domestic tours conducted by o.p. no.2. But it was very astonishing that after enquiry complainants found that o.p. no.2 was charging at least Rs.10,000/- per head extra amount than the domestic tour conducted by other tour operators. Then complainants prayed to refund the amount in cash. But o.p. no.2 did not refund the money in full. They have refunded a portion of the advance amount. Hence the instant application praying for refund of the advance amount along with compensation and cost.

            O.p. nos.1 and 2 appeared before the Forum and filed w/v. In their w/v o.ps. denied all material allegations interalia stated that o.ps’ tours are subject to certain terms and conditions. The position in respect of cancellation of tour they cannot comment anything whether the reasons are vague or unclear to the complainants. All terms and conditions were clearly explained to the complainants before booking. Complainants were fully aware at the time of booking that the booking amount is liable to be forfeited in the event of rejection of visa and thus the instant complaint is frivolous, vexatious and is liable to be dismissed with cost.  

Decision with reasons:

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is admitted fact that both the complainants opted for an escorted tour to Europe. It is also admitted fact that both the complainants paid the advance amount as per terms and conditions of the agreement. Terms and conditions were not given to the complainants before taking the advance amount from them. As per direction of o.p. no.2, complainants visited their office for visa interview and accordingly gave the interview successfully. All on a sudden o.p. no.2 informed them that their visa application had been rejected. O.ps. only plea is that visa is at the sole discretion of the concerned embassy of consulate. But o.p. no.2 has sent necessary documents for approval of visa of the complainants. From the visa rejection letter it is not clear that for what reason visas of the complainants had been refused. The contents of Refusal of Entry Clearance forwarded to both the complainants are more or less same. O.p. no.2 has arranged for visa but after refusal letter by the concerned authority o.ps. did not take any step to solve the problem of the complainants rather they have taken the plea that their advance amount would be forfeited as the amount is non refundable interest free. But o.ps. offered the complainants for alternative domestic tour by providing a discount which means o.ps. have admitted that there is deficiency in service on their part. O.ps. have refunded a sum of Rs.8200/- for each of the complainant on 5.10.12. O.ps. have sent the amount to complainant no.1 through NEFT. So there is no scope to complainant no.1 not to receive the amount. Though o.ps. have given the amount by way of cheque to complainant no.2, it is not full and final settlement as that has been declared only on the part of o.ps. Complainants asked for refund deducting the cancellation charges for hotel booking and flight tickets. O.ps. had not provide any documents which show that they have booked the hotels in the name of complainants and booked the tickets. O.ps. also have not produced any document towards cancellation charge as aforesaid and any processing fee towards their loss. So we find deficiency in service on the part of o.ps. and as such, complainants are entitle to get relief.

            Hence, ordered,

            That that the case is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. O.p. nos.1 and 2 are jointly and/or severally directed to give Rs.12,800/- (Rupees twelve thousand eight hundred) only to complainant no.1 and Rs.12,800/- (Rupees twelve thousand eight hundred) only to complainant no.2 as balance amount which was paid by complainants and are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.8,000/- (Rupees eight thousand) only to each  for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only to each within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.