This complaint under section 12 of Consumers Protection Act, 1986 filed by complainant Ajay Kr. Banik it is contended inter-alia to the effect that complainant tendered Rs.5,998/- on 26/6/’12 to O.P. under invoice no.TRNPL/DLI/2012, order no. 87142 issued by O.P. and obtained Membership no. BITI20201225 of O.P. and the complainant further tendered Rs.450/- to O.P. for booking processing fees for enjoying free holiday accommodation for himself, his wife & two sons in sales provisions affiliated resorts of the O.P. while the complainant paid said Rs.450/- against transaction ID-1018111613 on 14/09/’12 he also sent his choice of booking holiday resorts at Goa for the period of 07/02/’13 to 10/02/’13 for availing agreed sales promotion offer and this payment was admitted by O.P. on 17/09/’12 who confirmed the same by sending e-mail to the complainant wherein the O.P. informed the complainant that the confirmation of booking would be made after last week of December-2012.The complainant purchased to and fro Air ticket for journey to Goa on 07/02/’13 and it was duly informed to the O.P. since purchase though the complainant several times contacted Customer Care Helpdesk No. of O.P. but he got no confirmation from O.P. for intended booking at Holiday Resort at Goa till the date of his journey. When the complainant got no confirmation from O.P. till last day of January-’13, he was compelled to book two rooms, of Anup Holiday Home at Goa on line for said period of 07/02/’13 to 10/02/’13 by spending total sum of Rs.15,795/-. Inspite of having advance amount when the O.P. neglected to confirm the booking in questions and even on 05/02/’13 when the complainant was finally declined by O.P. in relation to providing accommodation in question at Goa, it amounts to deficiency in service and restrictive trade practice on the part of the O.P. Hence this case.
Perused the record with meticulous care. On perusal of the same we got materials to say that inspite of service of process as the O.P. did not take any step to proceed with the case, the case is being disposed of with Ex-parte hearing against O.P.
Again we have perused the complaint and the documents filed there on with meticulous care. On perusal of the same we got sufficient materials to say that the contents of the complainant has not been challenged by the opposite party. The contents of the complainant being unchallenged remain unrebutted. That apart after having close scrutiny of the materials on record we don’t find any ingredient to rebut the said contents of the complainant. This being the position we do hold that the complainant is entitled to get relief as sought for.
Thus, the case succeeds.
Hence it is
O r d e r e d
That the C.C. No. 55/2013 Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act1986 filed by Ajay Kumar Banik be and the same is decreed Ex-parte against the O.P. with cost of Rs2,000/-(Rupees two thousand)only. The O.P. is directed to pay a sum of Rs6,448/-(Rupees six thousand four hundred and forty-eight)only in favour of complainant as advanced amount and booking fee.
The O.P is further directed to pay Rs.15,000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand)only to the complainant for his mental agony & harassment.
The O.P. is further directed to pay off the entire decretal amount mentioned about in favour of the complainant, within one month from this date, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to recover the said entire decretal amount along with interest @9% p.a. to be calculated on and from the date of filing of this case till liquidation of the entire decretal amount by filing a separate proceedings against the O.P. as per provision of law.
The O.P. is further directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand)only in the name of State Consumer Welfare Fund within one month from this date.
