Order-13.

Date-27/06/2017.

       Shri Kamal De, President.

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

            Complainant’s case in short, is that OP is a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956.  In January, 2016 Mrs. Sumitra Roy Choudhury, the wife of the complainant applied before the OP to become an advisor of the OP Company.  The OP Company offered commission to its advisors for referring people to book their holiday trip through the Yatra.com.  It is an online travel agency providing information, pricing, booking facilities for domestic, international travel, railway reservation hotel booking etc. etc.  After becoming the advisor of the OP Company the wife of the complainant referred the said company to her husband, the complainant herein for booking a holiday trip to the Spain for the month of May, 2016.  The complainant decided to book their long desired vacation trip to Spain for 11-05-2016.  The flights, hotel, accommodations, car rental for travel of the complainant along with his wife were all booked through the OP company.  The complainant also requested the OP to issue four ‘rail passes’ for each of them as the issuance of railway pass also was included in their travel itinerary.  The complainant also paid an amount of Rs.4,54,460/- to the company for the aforesaid booking which included the issuance of rail pass from Madrid to Seville, Seville to Granada, Granada to Malaga and Malaga to Barcelona.  The complainant also requested the OP to make reservation of the train seats for himself and his wife on 09-05-2016 from Madrid to Seville and also for travel of the other seats for which they have requested to issue rail passes.  On 14-05-2016 the complainant was scheduled to travel from Madrid to Seville.  The complainant and his wife went to Madrid Railway Station at around 8.00 a.m. for reservation of the seats for next avail train for Seville.  The complainant in the meantime called the concerned persons of the OP Company for assistance but no information or effective suggestion could be obtained from any of them.  When the complainant tried to book the seats fro the train to Seville he came to learn that though the rail pass issued through OP company for him was valid one but the rail pass for his wife is not valid.  The complainant subsequently came to know that the rail pass for his wife was cancelled for some unknown reason.  The complainant called Ms. Ritika Oberoi, the concerned person of OP but she casually replied that it was showing valid in their system.  The complainant was compelled to buy fresh railway pass for the train at 4.00 p.m. for his wife and that was also for first class as there was no availability in other class and he had to convert his pass at first class also.  The complainant thereafter, returned to hotel to collect their luggage and after collecting the same he along with his wife returned back to the Madrid Railway Station and after enquiry the complainant came to learn that other three passes for his wife were also invalid.  The complainant again called the said Ms. Ritika Oberoi but her reply was same that it was showing valid in their system.  The complainant also sent scan copy of the passes stamped ‘invalid’ to Ms. Ritika Oberoi and then the said agent of the OP asked the complainant to issue fresh passes for his wife and committed to refund amount shortly. The complainant, thereafter, got reservation for the rest of the railway journey beforehand to avoid the pathetic situation which occurred only because of the wrong advice of the agent of the OP Company to get the reservation done one hour before journey.  The complainant has alleged that he and his wife could not sit together in the journeys and they had to travel by different compartments which caused harassment to them roam around with luggage in the train.  The complainant also had to spend extra amount 450 Euros (Rs.32,659/-) for such trip.  On 31-05-2016 complainant sent an e-mail to the OP Company, intimated his holiday experience and demanded compensation from the OP.  OP on 04-06-2016 intimated that OP would refund the aforesaid amount of Rs.30,398/- to the complainant and requested time till 08-06-2016 but OP did not refund the amount and kept matter linger to months together.  On 06-09-2016 the wife of the complainant received a mail from Ms. Ritika Oberoi intimating the complainant that they would refund 246.46 Euro (Rs.17,929/-) instead of 418.10 Euro.  It is alleged that complainant and his wife was harassed by the OP for such illegality.  The complainant has alleged deficiency in service and demanded refund of total amount he paid for Spain trip of Rs.4,54,460/-.  Hence, this case.

            OP has contested the case in filing written version contending, inter alia, that the case is not maintainable either in fact or in law.  It is stated that OP is merely a ticketing agent providing facility, through medium of internet and phone and arranges for tour and travel booking as per users convenience with best possible routes.  It is alleged that the claims made by the complainant are false, frivolous and baseless.  It is stated that complainant had booked a trip to Spain for himself and his wife from the OP and the package included rail pass for local travelling at Spain.  The complainant had to take the reservation on the basis of the passes by paying some amount on his own.  On 14-05-2016 the complainant called the representative and informed the railway pass of the wife of the complainant was not valid.  The representative of the OP checked the status of the pass and the same was showing as valid but in order to providing any discomfort to the complainant, the representative of the OP told the complainant to purchase another train pass and OP would refund the same to him.  The complainant did not communicate with the OP during the tour thereafter.  The complainant after completion of the tour, however, contacted the representative of the OP and asked to refund 418.10 Euro (Rs.30,398/-) including taxi fare from hotel to Madrid Station.  The OP informed that it had only a discussion regarding purchase of the railway pass and had agreed for reimbursement of the same.  it never agreed for any expenses in any other heads claimed by the complainant.  The OP agreed to refund all other amounts except 171.3 Euros spent for rail ticket from Madrid to Seville as a goodwill gesture and as there was neither any agreement nor any need to purchase new ticket.  It is stated that OP has already refunded an amount of 118 Euros.  It is denied that OP is deficient in rendering services to the complainant.  It is stated that the allegations are exaggerated and frivolous.  This OP has prayed for dismissal of the case.

Point for Decision

1. Whether the OP is deficient in rendering service to the complainant?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the decree?  If so, to what extent?

Decision with Reasons

We have perused the documents on record i.e. Xerox copy of flight tickets, Xerox copy of travel summary/itinerary, Xerox copy of new rail passes, Xerox copies of e-mails exchanged between the parties, Xerox copy of rail passes – in the name of Mrs. Sumitra Roy Choudhury along with new rail passes and other documents on record.

            We find that the complainant booked their trip to Spain through the OP Company scheduled from 11-05-2016.  The flights, hotel accommodations and car rental for the trip of the complainant and his wife were all booked through the OP Company.  OP as we find also requested the OP to issue four railway passes for each of them and such issuance of rail was also included in their travel itinerary.

            Complainant paid an amount of Rs.4,54,460/- to the OP for the aforesaid booking including the issuance of rail passes from Madrid to Seville, Seville to Granada, Granada to Malaga and Malaga to Barcelona.  We have also perused the copies of receipt of payment.  We find that all the rail passes issued in the name of the wife of the complainant and which was booked through OP Company were invalid.  The complainant had to buy fresh rail passes for both of them and that too in the first class compartment for non-availability of railway tickets in other classes of the train.  The complainant had to upgrade his ticket to first class to accompany his wife which further cost him extra amount.  Moreover, it is alleged by the complainant that the complainant and his wife could not sit together in any of their railway journeys causing harassment and also carrying of luggage from one place to other.  The complainant intimated the agent of the OP about such inconvenience and the incident but the said agent dealt the matter in casual manner.  We find that the complainant was placed in trouble and harassment in a foreign country.  The complainant had also to spend extra amount of 418.10 Euro i.e. Rs.30,398/-, the details of which are as follows.

            It also transpires that the complainant demanded the said amount from the OP Company but the OP Company did not refund the same.  It is, however, stated from the side of the OP that OP has offered to refund a total amount of Rs.246.6 Euros and has already refunded 118 Euros i.e. Rs.9,600/-.  It is stated that the OP is only liable to refund the cost of rail pass i.e. 171.5 Euros and the other claim made by the complainant for other expenses is not covered in the package.

            We find that the couple faced a lot of harassment both physically as well as mentally in the foreign country for the deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The trip was full of anxiety and discomfort.  The complainant along with his wife also faced bitter experience running around from Station to Hotel.  It is started that a refund equivalent to Euro 118 has already been auto-pressed but OP has not filed any document to show that it was deposited in the bank account of the complainant.

            Be that as it may, we think that OP has demonstrated a gesture of deficiency of service and failed and neglected to render service to the complainant while he was travelling in a foreign country depending on the commitment of the OP.  We think that OP is to compensate the complainant and refund the amount of Rs.30,398/- equivalent to 418.10 Euro.  We think that the fault lies with the OP and not with the complainant.  Complainant went through agonizing experiences for the deficiency in service on the part of the OP and OP cannot say that he will not pay for renfe rail passes for the rest of the rail journey for Mrs. Sumitra Roy Choudhury.

            However, we refrain from passing any award for the entire sum of Rs.4,54,460/- as claimed by the complainant and which was paid to the OP for Spain trip because complainant went to Spain using flight tickets and other expenses arranged by the OP Company and OP had to foot the bill for all such arrangement and accommodation of the couple in Spain. 

Consequently, the case merits success in part.

Hence,

Ordered

That the instant case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP.

            OP is directed to refund an amount of Rs.418.10 Euro i.e. Rs.30,398/- to the complainant towards extra expenses during his trip to Spain minus the amount of Euro 118, if already paid and if not paid to pay the entire said amount. 

            OP is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant for causing harassment, mental pain and agony apart from litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- within the said stipulated period.

Failure to comply with the order will entitle the complainant to put the order into execution under appropriate provision in C.P. Act.