View 1037 Cases Against Travel
Harish C. Jain filed a consumer case on 23 Jul 2019 against Your Travel Advisors in the DF-II Consumer Court. The case no is CC/657/2018 and the judgment uploaded on 06 Aug 2019.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH
======
Consumer Complaint No | : | 657 of 2018 |
Date of Institution | : | 16.11.2018 |
Date of Decision | : | 23.07.2019 |
Harish C. Jain, HCS, Addl. Collector-cum-S.D.M. (Retired), S/o Sh.A.c.Jain, Resident of Arth Prakash Bhawan, Sector 29-D, Chandigarh.
……..Complainant
1] Your Tour Advisor Pvt. Ltd., 417, Aditya High Street Lal Kuna, Ghaziabad (UP) 201009 through Sh.Sandeep Kumar, Incharge.
2nd Address:-
Sh.Sandeep Kumar, Your Tour Advisor Pvt. Ltd., R/o H.No.9, Manasarover, Kavi Nagar, Gaziabad (UP) 201009
2] M/s Hello Travel, E-75, Sector 63, Noida 201309
………. Opposite Parties
SH.RAVINDER SINGH MEMBER
Argued By: Sh.K.C.Singla, Adv. for complainant.
Opposite Party No.1 exparte.
Sh.Dilpreet Singh, Adv. for OP-2.
The case of the complainant in brief is that he approached Online Hello Travel i.e. OP No.2 for tour package of Goa for 3 Nights & 4 days (from 27.9.2018 to 30.9.2018) and finalized Opposite Party NO.1 for said tour package (Caravela Beach Resort 3 rooms, 7 adults +3 children, taxes, Breakfast + Dinner and personal Tempo Traveller-12 Seater) at a total cost of Rs.61,200/- on 2.8.21018 and transferred an amount of Rs.20,000/- in the account of Opposite Party No.1 on the same day (Ann.C-1 & C-2). It is averred that even after booking & advance payment, Opposite Party NO.1 never sent Hotel Vouchers and other relevant documents regarding stay/booking at Goa. The complainant sent several emails and called on telephone, but the Opposite Party NO.1 never responded (Ann.C-3 to C-6). It is averred that left with no option, the complainant had to make last minute arrangements and had to book another Hotel ‘Hard Rock’ at Goa by paying exorbitant price being instant booking i.e. Rs.86864/- for stay for 3 nights & 4 days + Breakfast, Dinner for family for Rs.20,000/- approx. and Transport Vehicle costs Rs.15,680/- (Ann.C-7). It is submitted that the complainant had to bear extra charges of Rs.61,344/- (Rs.122544-61200) due to non-performance of deal and negligence on the part of Opposite Party No.1. Thereafter, the complainant sent legal notice to the OPs seeking refund of Rs.81,344/- (61344-20000), which was replied by Opposite Party No.1 apologizing for their act and stated that they did not have the account number of the complainant (Ann.C-9). The Opposite Party NO.2 replied that they have removed Opposite Party NO.1 from their platform for this negligence (Ann.C-10). Alleging the above act & conduct of the Opposite Parties as gross deficiency in service, hence this complaint has been filed.
2] Opposite Party NO.1 did not turn up despite service of notice even through publication, hence it was proceeded exparte vide order dated 5.4.2019.
The Opposite Party No.2 has filed reply stating that HelloTravel Online Pvt. Ltd. (HTOPL) owns and operate an online discovery platform, which works like a Search Engine namely www.hellotravel.com wherein different third party business entities like Travel Agencies/Travel Agents List/Host/Advertise their services, and this listing can be viewed by the general public while browsing the HTOPL website like the complainant in this case. It is averred that HTOPL does not charge any service charges or any fee from the user who visit its site nor the same has been charged from the complainant. It is stated that during the course of match making, the role of HTOPL website is limited to sharing the contact details of one or more travel agent/travel agencies to the traveler. It is also stated that the complainant himself decided to opt to proceed with Opposite Party No.1 and Opposite Party No.2 is not the privy to the negotiations, offer, acceptance, payment, if any took place between the Travel Agent/OP No.1 and the complainant, in any manner. It is submitted that the complainant is not a ‘consumer’ qua Opposite Party NO.2. It is also submitted that the alleged payment was directly made by the complainant in the account of Opposite Party NO.1 for the alleged tour package and no amount was ever paid in any manner to Opposite Party NO.2. Denying all other allegations and pleading no deficiency in service, the Opposite Party No.2 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3] Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
4] We have heard the ld.Counsel for the complainant, ld.Counsel for Opposite Party No.2 and have also perused the entire record.
5] No dispute that the complainant approached online ‘Hello Travel’ i.e. Opposite Party No.2, the search engine for providing of tour package for Goa for 3 nights & 4 days from 27.9.2018 to 30.9.2018. and finalized, Opposite Party No.1 for above tour package (Caravela Beach Resort 3 rooms, 7 adults +3 children, taxes, Breakfast + Dinner and personal Tempo Traveller-12 Seater) at a total cost of Rs.61,200/- on 2.8.21018. The complainant paid/transferred an amount of Rs.20,000/- in the account of OP No.1 on 2.8.2018 (Ann.C-1), which was acknowledged by it on 13.8.2018 vide Ann. C-2.
6] It is the duly sworn averments of the complainant that the OP No.1 even after booking & advance payment, did not send Hotel Vouchers & other documents regarding stay/booking at Goa. The complainant sent emails to OP No.1 on 2.9.2018, 5.9.2018, 12.9.2017 & 26.9.2018 (Ann.C-3 to 6), and even made telephone calls in respect of booked tour package, but nothing was done. The OP No.2 vide email dated 5.9.2018 also reminded OP NO.1 to contact the complainant and resolve the matter. Ultimately, the complainant having no alternative, as air-tickets were already booked for said days, has to make last minute arrangements and booked another Hotel ‘Hard Rock’ at Goa by paying Rs.86864/- for stay for 3 nights & 4 days + Breakfast, Dinner for family for Rs.20,000/- approx. and Transport Vehicle costs Rs.15,680/- (Ann.C-7). It is also contended that the complainant had to bear extra charges due to non-performance of deal and negligence on the part of Opposite Party No.1.
7] The stand of Opposite Party NO.2 that it has no privy to the negotiations took place between the complainant and Opposite Party NO.1, is not sustainable. The complainant could finalize his deal with Opposite Party No.1 only when the name of Opposite Party No.1 was listed on the platform/portal of Opposite Party NO.2 and hence it is also liable for the act & conduct of Opposite Party NO.1.
8] Also OP No.1 chose not to appear and preferred to be proceeded exparte, which raises a reasonable presumption that either it admit the claim of the complainant or has nothing to contradict the duly sworn allegations of complainant as contained in the complaint and are therefore correct.
9] In the circumstances, as discussed above, we are of the considered view that the OPs not only remained deficient in providing proper service to the complainant, but also indulged into unfair trade practice and thus, forced the complainant to indulge in avoidable litigation. Therefore, the present complaint is allowed against OPs No.1 & 2 with following directions:-
This order be complied with by the opposite parties, within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the OPs shall also be liable to pay additional compensatory cost of Rs.10,000/- apart from the above relief.
8] The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.
23rd July, 2019
Sd/-
(RAJAN DEWAN)
PRESIDENT
Sd/-
(PRITI MALHOTRA)
MEMBER
Sd/-
(RAVINDER SINGH)
MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.