West Bengal

North 24 Parganas

CC/365/2018

Sri Sankar Bhunia - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Kuntal Bhattacharya - Opp.Party(s)

Tanmoy Das

20 Jun 2024

ORDER

DCDRC North 24 Paraganas Barasat
Kolkata-700126.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/365/2018
( Date of Filing : 07 Sep 2018 )
 
1. Sri Sankar Bhunia
S/O Lt. Kali Pada Bhunia, Kushpata, P.O.& P.S.-Ghatal, Pin-721212
Paschim Midnapore
West Bengal704403
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Sri Kuntal Bhattacharya
Prop. of Jajabar Tourist Centre, S/O Chancal Bhattacharya, Radha Cinema Building, P.O.-Ichapur Nawabgunj, P.S.-Noapara, Pin-743144
North 24 Parganas
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Daman Prasad Biswas PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sri Abhijit Basu MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 20 Jun 2024
Final Order / Judgement

DIST. CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESAL  COMMISSION

NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.

C.C. No. 365/2018

 

     Date of Filing                         Date of Admission                              Date of Disposal

       07.09.2018                                   17.09.2018                                          20.06.2024

 

Complainant/s:-

  1. SRI SANKAR BHUNIA, S/o Late Kali pada Bhunia of Kushpata, P.O. and P.S. Ghatal, District – Paschim Midnapur, PIN – 721212.
  2. SRI PANKAJ KUMAR BERA, S/o Late Pulin Bihari Bera of Vill – Ballichak, P.O. – Ballichak, P.S. Debra, District – Paschim Midnapur, PIN – 721124.

-Vs.-

Opposite Party/s:-

  1. SIR KUNTAL BHATTACHARYA, (Proprietor of Jajabar Tourist Centre), S/o Sri Chanchal Bhattacharya of Radha cinema building, P.O. – Ichhapur, Nawabgunj, P.S. – Noapara, PIN – 743144 and 10, Old Court House Street, 1st floor, Kol – 1.

           

P R E S E N T                 :- Sri. Daman Prosad Biswas……….President.

                                                :- Sri.  Abhijit Basu…………………. Member.

                       

JUDGMENT/FINAL ORDER

 

            The Complainant filed a complaint as per Consumer Protection Act.

 

            The brief facts of the case is Complainant booked for a package tour of Andaman which was scheduled to take place in the month of October 2017 by the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party, ‘JAJABAR TOURIST’ CENTRE, which carries a tour and travel business. They announced for the said tour programme for Andaman package in the month of 2017. Accordingly Complainant paid a sum of Rs. 1,53,000/- and a sum of Rs. 63,400/- respectively towards the Opposite Party as advance in the month of August 2017. In this regard Opposite Party issued the money receipts. Suddenly Opposite Party informed the Complainant that the said tour for Andaman shall not take place in the month of October 2017 and it shall be delayed but the Opposite Party did not explain the reason for delayed the said package tour programme.          

It was inconvenient and not possible by the Complainant to make the said tour after October 2017. As such the Complainant requested the Opposite Party to refund the said advance amount. But the Opposite Party did not refund the same and at last denied to return the advance money.  

            Compelling circumstances, Complainant sent a demand notice through his Ld. Advocate Riya Mitra on 25/06/2018 vide receipt no. EW782015975 to the Opposite Party with a request to refund the said advance amount. But the said Opposite Party refused to accept the said demand notice. In this regard, Complainant filed a written complaint before the Noapara Police Station on 25/07/2018 but in vain.

 

 

Contd. To Page No. 2 . . . ./

 

: :  2  : :

C.C. No. 365/2018

 

Compelling circumstances, Complainant filed this complaint before this Commission and thereafter this Commission sent notice to the Opposite Party. But inspite of receiving the notice Opposite Party did not feel any urge to appear before this Commission and O.P did not file W/V. Hence, the case do run ex-parte against the O.P.

 

Issue framed for the purpose of decision

 

  1. Whether the case is maintainable or not?
  2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief or reliefs or not?

 

Reason with Decision

 

 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as nature and character, all the points are interlinked with each other and as such all the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of brevity and convenience.

We have perused all the photocopy of documents along with supporting affidavit of complaint and photocopy related documents and argument of the Complainant.

The case is within territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission. Hence, this Commission has ample power to try this case.

In the instant case Complainant paid the advance amount of Rs. 1,53,500/- for package of tour of Andaman to the Opposite Party and the said tour was scheduled to take place in the month of October 2017 but unfortunately Opposite Party informed the Complainant that said date of tour for Andaman shall not take place in the month of October 2017 without showing any reason. As O.P scheduled the Andaman tour programme in the month of October 2017 as such the Complainant booked the same as time schedule was matched with the time of Complainant.

When the date of schedule tour programme was differed by the O.P as such it is the choice of the Complainant whether he would go on the other date fixed by O.P or not.

It is mentioned that the reason was not explained by the Opposite Party for deferred the date of schedule tour programme. The Opposite Party did not provide any reasonable and satisfactory cause to the Complainant for deferred the date of tour programme. It is mentioned that it was not possible for the Complainant to make tour after October 2017. Hence, the Complainant demanded to return the advance amount. But the Opposite Party denied and refused to return the advance amount which was paid by the Complainant. It is deficiency of service on the part of O.P. as O.P. deferred the date of scheduled tour programme without showing any valid reason.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contd. To Page No. 3 . . . ./

 

: :  3  : :

C.C. No. 365/2018

 

Compelling circumstances, Complainant sent demand notice on 25/06/2018 but in vain. As the O.P announced that the package tour programme would be held in the month of October 2017 as such the Complainant booked the same but without showing any appropriate reason. The Opposite Party delayed his scheduled package tour programme of Andaman without showing any valid reason. The Opposite Party informed that the said package tour programme for Andaman shall not be take place in the month of October 2017 and it shall be delayed. It was declared by Complainant that is was not possible for the Complainant to make said tour after October 2017 as such the Complainant informed the same to the O.P and prayed to refund the advance amount. But the Opposite Party did not pay any heed and refuse to refund the advance money.

 

Compelling circumstances, the Complainant sent legal notice to the Opposite Party but in vain. Thereafter, Complainant filed complaint before Noapara Police Station and also Barrackpore Police Commissionerate on 25/07/2018 but in vain.

 

The scheduled tour programme was fixed by the O.P in the month of October 2017 but it is not possible by the Complainant to joint tour programme after October 2017.

 

Time schedule programme and tour programme is the factor of everybody to spend time and the Complainant cannot move as per choice of the O.P and/or date fixed by the O.P. As all the persons are busy well with their personal and official work. Here, time is the main essence of any tour programme.

 

We are in view that as the O.P deferred the schedule tour programme of Andaman as such it is choice of the Complainant whether he would go on other date or not. Complainant was booked the schedule tour programme of Andaman in the month of October 2017 as announced by the O.P. O.P cannot deferred the schedule of tour programme without any valid reason. If the deferred date is not matched with the time of Complainant in that event O.P is liable to refund the advance money which he received. The date of schedule programme is deferred by O.P. So, the O.P is liable to refund the money which he received.

 

In this case, Complainant is a consumer and O.P is service provider.

 

O.P is not provide the service inspite of receiving money which would be treated as deficiency in service on the part of O.P as per Consumer Protection Act. In the instant case Complainant proved his case and he is entitled to get relief.

 

 

 

Contd. To Page No. 4 . . . ./

 

 

: :  4  : :

C.C. No. 365/2018

 

Hence ,

 

It is ordered,

 

That the case being no. C.C./365/2018 be and the same is allowed ex-party.

 

It is hereby directed the Opposite Party to refund the advance amount of Rs. 1,53,500/- (one lakh fifty three thousand five hundred) and a sum of Rs. 63,400/- (sixty three thousand four hundred) in favour of the Complainant with compensation and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) within 45 days from the date of passing this order failing which the Opposite Party shall liable to pay an interest @9% p.a. till recovery failing which the Complainant is at liberty to file execution case as per provision of law.

 

Let a plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.

 

Dictated and Corrected by me

 

Member

 

 

Member                                                                                                          President

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C.C. No. /365/2018

Order No. 27

Dated:- 20.06.2024

 

 

Today is fixed for final order / judgment. Ld. Advocate for the Complainant is present.

 

Final Order / Judgment is ready and same is pronounced in open Ejlash.

 

Final Order / Judgment is kept with the record. As per Final Order / Judgment

 

                        It is

                                    Ordered:-

 

That the case being no. C.C./365/2018 be and the same is allowed ex-party.

 

It is hereby directed the Opposite Party to refund the advance amount of Rs. 1,53,500/- (one lakh fifty three thousand five hundred) and a sum of Rs. 63,400/- (sixty three thousand four hundred) in favour of the Complainant with compensation and litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) within 45 days from the date of passing this order failing which the Opposite Party shall liable to pay an interest @9% p.a. till recovery failing which the Complainant is at liberty to file execution case as per provision of law.

 

Let a plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.

 

Dictated and Corrected by me

 

 

Member

 

 

Member                                                                                                          President

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Daman Prasad Biswas]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri Abhijit Basu]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.