Mr. Urvinder Singh filed a consumer case on 08 May 2018 against The General Manager, Yatra Online Private Ltd., in the DF-II Consumer Court. The case no is CC/750/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 15 Jan 2020.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH
======
Consumer Complaint No | : | 750 of 2017 |
Date of Institution | : | 22.09.2017 |
Date of Decision | : | 08.05.2018 |
1] Urvinder Singh s/o Mr.Gurbax Singh, aged about 56 years, resident of H.No.514, Sector 33, Chandigarh.
2] Mrs.Moninder Kaur alias Ginny Malhotra w/o Mr.Urvinder Singh, aged about 49 years, resident of H.No.514, Sector 33, Chandigarh.
…..Complainants
1] M/s Yatra Online Private Ltd., through its General Manager, SCO No.477-78, 1st Floor, Sector 35-C, Chandigarh 160022
2] The General Manager, Yatra Online Private Ltd., 6th Floor, Tower-d, Unitech Cyber Park, Sector 39, Gurgaon 122001
….. Opposite Parties
Argued by :- Sh.Deepak Malhotra, Adv. for complainants.
Sh.Sachin Ohri, Adv. for Opposite Parties
PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER
Briefly stated, the complainants hired the services of the OPs for their trip to Hong Kong for celebrating the birthday of their son Ronaq Malhotra in Hong Kong and as such paid an amount of Rs.45000/- (Ann.C-1 colly.). It is averred that the representative of the OPs told the complainant that no visa formality is required for Hong Kong and only pre-arrival registration (PAR) is required to be filled, which shall be guided by team of OP Company and the complainants should not worry. It is submitted that the executive of Opposite Party satisfied the complainant that the Pre Arrival Registration (PAR) is just a formality and shall be done soon. However, the OPs sent a link of Pre-Registration Arrival Form to the complainant on 18.4.2017 to be filled by them (Ann.C-3). It is submitted that the complainants were surprised to note that the Pre Arrival Registration (PAR) of both the complainants remained successful whereas the Pre Arrival Registration of their son Mr.Ronaq Malhotra remained unsuccessful on 18.4.2017 (Ann.C-4). When the matter was taken up with the OPs, they assured to solve the problem till after noon of 19.4.2017. However, when the Opposite Parties failed to do the needful, the complainants sent an email to Opposite Parties for refund of amount of Rs.45,000/-, followed by legal notice (Ann.C-6 & C-7), but the Opposite Parties did nothing. Hence, this complaint has been filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs.
2] The Opposite Parties have filed joint reply and while admitting the factual matrix of the case, stated that it never provided an assurance to the complainants for grant of visa by embassies as it is the sole discretion of concerned embassies. It is also stated that the Opposite Party is only responsible for making visa application on the basis of documents required as listed by the embassies and nothing more. It is submitted that despite the fact that booking amount was non-refundable, as a special case and as a gesture of goodwill, the complainant was informed that cancellation of only INR 13000/- will be charged and rest of the amount of Rs.32,000/- will be refunded, but the complainants did not give their consent for refund of the said amount and demanded full refund. It is also submitted that in case of cancellation of tour due to Visa rejection, no refunds are to be provided and it was duly informed to and agreed & signed by the complainants as per terms & conditions of booking. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, the Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3] Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
4] We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the entire record.
5] It is on record that the plan of the complainants to celebrate the birthday of their son Ronaq Malhotra in Hong Kong became unsuccessful and proved to be a failure for the reason that the Pre Arrival Registration of their son was rejected. The record further reveals that at the very juncture of the rejection of Pre Arrival Registration when the OPs were approached, were not available to help out the complainants in order to initiate the process of getting Pre Arrival Registration once again for their son and even did not bother to provide timely services, despite having been duly paid for the same.
6] Record reveals that in the absence of the due services i.e. due to non-assistance on the part of OPs at the relevant time caused wrongful loss to the complainants not only in monetary terms but also the sole purpose of planning a birthday celebration got frustrated effecting complainants emotionally. We are of the considered view that the amount paid by the complainants has wrongly been forfeited by the OPs, which they are liable to refund without any deduction, on account of their deficient services.
7] From the above discussion and findings, the deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties has been proved, which certainly caused harassment and humiliation to the complainants. Therefore, the complaint stands allowed against the OPs with direction to refund an amount of Rs.45,000/- to the complainants and also to pay compensation cost of Rs.7,000/- along with litigation expenses of Rs.5000/- to the complainants.
This order shall be complied with by the Opposite Parties within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which they shall be liable to pay additional compensation cost of Rs.10,000/- apart from above relief.
The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.
8th May, 2018 Sd/-
(RAJAN DEWAN)
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
(PRITI MALHOTRA)
MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.