SRI. SAJEESH.K.P : MEMBER
The complainant has filed this complaint U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 seeking direction against opposite party to refund Rs.1,62,044/- which was booking charge of cruise trip and also pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony.
Complaint in brief
According to the advertisement of OP seen on various social media platform, complainant contacted OP to get her tickets booked for 4 adults and 2 children and 1 infant, in Cordelia Cruise package for 3 day trip from Cochin to Chennai. The package cost was Rs.1,62,044/- for the said passengers and on 11/05/2023 complainant paid the entire amount to OP’s bank account. Moreover, complainant booked two tier AC round ticket for travelling to Chennai and vice versa. To the dismay of complainant, from 22/05/2023 onwards the OP was not contactable and complainant come to know that OP deceived the complainant as they did to many. The complainant suffered financial loss as well as mental agony for the deficiency in service and hence this complaint.
After filing the complaint, notice was issued to OP and the notice returned with an endorsement as shop closed. After that complainant take fresh steps against OP through paper publication and OP not appeared before the commission and not filed any version. Hence the commission set OP has set ex-parte.
Even though the OP has remained ex-parte, it is for the complainant to establish the allegation made by him against the OPs. Hence the complainant was called upon to produce evidence in the form of affidavit and documents. The complainant filed his proof affidavit along with 6 documents which is marked as them Ext.A1 to A6. . Ext.A1 is the brochure issued by OP, Ext.A2 is the copy of lawyer notice, Ext.A3 is the postal receipt, Ext.A4 is the acknowledgment card, A5 is the unclaimed notice and Ext.A6 is the certified copy of bank statement. The complainant was examined as Pw1. So the OP remains absent in this case. At the end the commission heard the case on merit.
Let us have clear glance into available evidence before the commission in order to answer whether there is any deficiency in service as prayed in the complaint.
The OP being set ex-parte, the commission perused the documents which were marked as Ext.A1 to A6. . Ext.A1 reveals the statement of complainant regarding the advertisement of tour package by OP. Ext.A2 which was the lawyer notice sent by complainant, seen returned as per Ext. A5with an endorsement “door locked intimation”. Hence the averment regarding the willful refusal and service deficiency is apparent. Moreover, the averment regarding the consideration paid by complainant from her company account is apparent from Ext.A6. The Ext.A6 is the speaking evidence that on 13/05/2023, Rs.1,62,044/- was transacted to travel care ie. OP’s account. Hence on the perusal of all documents before the commission it is found that the documents goes in tune with the complaint and thereby the commission came into a conclusion that OP is liable for deficiency in service and complainant is entitled to get compensation and cost to the litigation.
In the result the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 1,62,044/- which was booking charge of cruise trip and also by Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost to complainant for the deficiency in service from the part of opposite party within 30 days of receipt of this order. In default the complainant carry 10% interest of Rs. 1,62,044/- per annum from the date of order till realization. Failing which, the complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 2019.
Exts.
A1 – Copy of brochure issued by OP
A2 - Copy of lawyer notice
A3 - Postal receipt
A4 - Acknowledgment card
A5 - unclaimed notice
A6 – Certified copy of bank statement
Pw1 - Complainant
Sd/ Sd/ Sd/
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Ravi Susha Molykutty Mathew Sajeesh K.P
(mnp)
/Forwarded by order/
Assistant Registrar
