Kerala

Kollam

CC/05/346

G.Ramakrishna Pillai,Dileep Bhavan,Kuzhiyam Thekku - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager,Arya Travels,Kottiyam and Other - Opp.Party(s)

B.K. Mohanan Pillai

29 Jul 2008

ORDER


C.D.R.F. KOLLAM : CIVIL STATION - 691013
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::: KOLLAM
consumer case(CC) No. CC/05/346

G.Ramakrishna Pillai,Dileep Bhavan,Kuzhiyam Thekku
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

The Manager,Arya Travels,Kottiyam and Other
Nizam,Bus Booking Agent,Thekke Charuvil Veedu,Umayanalloor.P.O.
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President 2. RAVI SUSHA : Member 3. VIJYAKUMAR. R : Member

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




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.

ORDER

By ADV. RAVISUSHA, MEMBER This complaint is filed by the complainant for getting an amount of Rs. 1,500/- advance amount and Rs. 25,000/- as compensation and cost. The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows: For the purpose of the marriage of complainant’s son the complainant has booked two buses of 1st opp.party on 13.5.2005 through the 2nd opp.party and paid an advance of Rs.1500/- in cash entrusted to the 2nd opp.party on 12.5.2005 in the presence of complainant’s neighbours Sri. Thulaseedharan. The marriage date was 28.8.2005. On 13.5.2005 the 2nd opp.party handed over the complainant an agreement from signed by the 1st opp.party as No.171 dated 13.5.2005 As per the agreement the first respondent was not arranged any bus service for the purpose of marriage to the complainant on 28.8.2005. Therefore the complainant was constrained to seek alternative arrangement for traveling marriage part to and from the place of residence to the place to marriage. By the act of 1st opp.party, the complain ant has sustained financial loss, mental agony and loss of reputation from the invitees of marriage. The act of 1st opp.party is amount to violation of contract, deficiency in service and the opp.parties are jointly and severally liable pay damages by way of compensating for a tune of Rs.32,500/- to the complainant. The 1st opp.party entered appearance and filed version. The 2nd opp.party remained absent and set exparte. The 1st opp.party filed version contending interalia. The first opp.party has no direct access with the complainant and he has not entered into any agreement with complainant. The agreement is entered between one Ramachandran Pillai. As per conditions 1 to 14 of agreement the first opp.party is absolved from liability in providing bus service on 28.8.2005. There is no Consumer relationship between the complainant and 1st opp.party. There are manipulations in Ext. D1. There is no deficiency in service on the party of the 1st opp.party. Hence the 1st opp.party prays to dismiss the complaint. The points that would arise for consideration are: 1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties. 2. Reliefs and cost. For the complainant PW.1 and PW.2 are examined. Ext.P1 and P2 series are marked. For the 1st opp.party DW.1 is examined and Ext. D1 is marked. With regard to agreement Ext.P1 instead of the name of the complainant it is written as one Ramachandran Pillai. But the address shown in the complaint and agreement are one and the same. The signature put in Ext.P1 is also not of the complaint. The complainant’s case is that he has booked two buses of the 1st opp.party through the 2nd opp.party and paid the advance amount in cash entrusted to the 2nd opp.party. The 2nd opp.party remained absent and not adduced any evidence, contradicting the pleading of the complainant. Hence we are constrained to believe the contentions of the complainant. Even if there is some corrections with respect to the amount shown in the agreement there is no other infirmity in the agreement. The agreement is binding between the 1st opp.party and the complainant even though the complainant has not complied the condition No.1 in Ext.P1. Hence there is no dispute that the buses are not sent as per Ext.P1 by the act of first opp.party the complainant was contended the seek alternative arrangement for traveling marriage party. For proving that the act of the opp.parties amount to deficiency in service and the opp.parties are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. In the result the complaint is allowed. The opp.parties are directed to pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as compensation. The opp.parties are also directed to pay Rs.1000/- as cost to the proceedings. The order is to be complied within one month from the date of receipt of the order. Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008. I N D E X List of witnesses for the complainant PW.1.G. Ramakrishna Pillai PW.2. - Thulaseedharan List of documents for the complainant P1. – Agreement dated 13.5.2005 P2. – Way bills dated 28.8.2005. List of witnesses for the opp.party DW.1. - Sudhakaran Pillai List of documents for the opp.party D1. Agreement form




......................K. VIJAYAKUMARAN : President
......................RAVI SUSHA : Member
......................VIJYAKUMAR. R : Member