DATE OF FILING : 23.12.2014.
DATE OF S/R : 04.02.2015.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 28.08.2015.
Sri Narayan Chandra Maity,
son of late Hari Pada Maity,
village Hizlock, P.O. & P.S. Bagnan,
District Howrah,
PIN 711303. ….………………………………………………….. COMPLAINANT.
Tara Maa Tourist and Caterer,
the Proprietor Rabin Adhikar,
village Hizlock ( near primary school ),
P.O. & P.S. Bagnan, District Howrah,
PIN 711303. …………………..……………………………………OPPOSITE PARTY.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.
F I N A L O R D E R
- Complainant, Narayan Chandra Maity, by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.p. to refund Rs. 26,000/- being the advance payment for tour package to Andaman & Nicobar Island, to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation along with other relief or reliefs as the Forum may deem fit and proper.
- Brief fact of the case is that complainant paid Rs. 26,000/- out of total consideration amount of Rs. 38,000/- to o.p., being a tour company, as an advance payment for a tour to Andaman & Nikobar Dippunja vide Annexure ‘A’ money receipt dated 17.8.2013. The tour was supposed to start on 2nd December. But the tour was not conducted by o.p. on the scheduled date. Thereafter o.p. changed the date of journey on several occasions but the journey did not take place. And till 31.7.2014, Rabin Adhikary, the proprietor of the o.p. company could not start the journey. So complainant gave a letter to him vide Annexure ‘B’ asking for the return of money. But o.p. remained silent. Then the complainant filed a complaint before Consumer Affairs Department on 21.8.2014. O.P. was called for appearing in the mediation. But he never attended. Being frustrated and finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid relief.
- Notice was served. O.P. appeared and filed any written version. Accordingly, case was heard on contest.
- Two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- Both the points are taken up together for consideration. The main contention of o.p. is that he never decided to conduct any tour to Andaman & Nicobar Island and also he never issued any money receipt of Rs. 26,000/- to the complainant. Now we take a pause. On the back side of the money receipt dated 17.8.2013, we find that on 23.6.2015 there was an endorsement duly signed by o.p. which contains the Name ‘ Andaman’ and ‘Time’ as 11.15 a.m. And it is not at all a luxury on the part of the complainant to file a case for an amount of Rs. 26,000/- only against a person without a valid reason. Surely, for some reason or other, o.p. could not conduct the journey. But he ought to have returned the amount to the complainant without putting him into so much trouble. It is nothing but unfair trade practice. Accordingly, we hold o.p. to be negligent in discharging his duty and he is found to be deficient in service.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 658 of 2014 ( HDF 658 of 2014 ) be allowed on contest with costs against the O.P.
That the o.p. is directed to return Rs. 26,000/- to the complainant.
That the O.P. is further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 3,000/- as compensation and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost.
That the o.p. is further directed to pay the entire amount of Rs. 30,000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of this order i.d., the aforesaid amount shall carry an interest @ 9% per annum till full realization.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( Jhumki Saha)
Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
