In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 293/2012.
1) Anarta Bhar,
FA-28, Narayantala Road (West), Kolkata-59.
Mailing address:
L.I.C.I. CBO-2,
7, Council House Street (Gr. Floor), Kolkata-1. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Wayfarers India Pvt. Ltd.
6B, Sultan Alam Road,
P.S. Charu Market, Kolkata-33. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member
Order No. 10 Dated 19-07-2013.
The case of the complainant in short is that complainant wanted to book some KSTDC hotel rooms through the o.p. as they verbally claimed to be an authorized agent of KSTDC. Their tour programme was scheduled from 22.5.12 to 9.6.12.
For this purpose on 19.3.12 complainant went to their above mentioned office and paid to Mr. D. Bhattacharya, who was one of the proprietors as claimed, a sum of Rs.20,000/- on Central Bank of India / R.C. Place Br., Kolkata in favour of Wayfarers India Pvt. Ltd. which was subsequently cleared on 21.3.12. Wayfarers India Pvt. Ltd. issued money receipts against these payments and complainant was asked to collect final reservation vouchers on 28.3.12.
The journey was scheduled to start on 22.5.12. Complainant contacted the Bangalore office of KSTDC and was informed that no bookings were made till 11-00 a.m. on that date. Shocked to receive this information complainant contacted them and demanded the money back. But money was not refunded. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.p. did not contest this case by filing w/v and matter was heard ex parte against the o.p.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the complainant, evidence and documents in particular. In this case sole o.p. did not appear and contest the case and matter was heard ex parte as against the sole o.p. In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we have no reason to disbelieve the evidence of complainant and we find that the evidence of complainant has remained unchallenged testimony and the same has not been rebutted by o.p. and we find that o.p. had sufficient deficiency in service being service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed ex parte with cost agsint the o.p. O.p. is directed to refund a sum of Rs.32,200/- (Rupees thirty two thousand two hundred) only paid to complainant and is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.7000/- (Rupees seven thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
