Date of Filing:20.12.2008

Date of Order: 17.03.2009

BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20

Dated: 17th DAY OF MARCH 2009

PRESENT

Sri. Bajentri H.M, B.A, LL.B., President

Smt.C.V. Rajamma, B.Sc., LL.B., PGDPR, Member


COMPLAINT NO. 2757 OF 2008

Mr. V. Suresh, SA Associates,
Advocates & Solicitors, No.1,
2nd Floor, Nissan House, Palm
Grove Road, Victoria Layout,
Bangalore-560 047. …. Complainant.

-V/s-

1.Orange Holidays, Fun & Beyond,
(Unit of Orange Properties),
No.405 & 406, Prestige Meridian II,
29-30, M.G. Road,
Bangalore-560 001.
Rep. by its Manager.

2.Mr. Sharath Chandran, Authorized
Signatory of Orange Holidays, Fun And
Beyond, (Unit of Orange Properties),
No.405 & 406, Prestige Meridian II,
29-30, M.G. Road,
Bangalore-560 001. …. Opposite Parties.

ORDER

The complainant has claimed the following relief’s from the opposite parties:-
(a) Direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.12,500/- to the complainant as expenditure caused to prepare pass-ports of the 5 Advocate Associates of the complainant,
(b) Direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,17,500/- along with interest at the rate of 3% per month from the date of booking till realization to the complainant as charges of the cancellation of the booked tickets within 7 days from the date of departure by the opposite parties,

(c) Direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as loss caused to the complainant due to not taking any work during the period from 01.12.2008 to 15.12.2008,

(d) Direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- as compensation towards the physical and mental agony caused to the complainant and his Colleagues due to deficiency of service of the opposite parties,

(e) Direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as costs of this proceedings, and

(f) Award any other appropriate relief, which this Honorable Forum deems fit in the circumstances of the case/matter/proceedings, in the interest of justice and equity.

The case of the complainant is as under:-
The complainant is an Advocate Associate with SA Associates, Advocates and Solicitors. The opposite parties are dong the business of booking Air Tickets under the name and style “Orange Holidays Fun and Beyond” to their valued customers to travel to Foreign Countries under the scheme of ‘Package Trips’. The complainant wanted to travel to Bangkok and Pattaya along with other five Advocate Associates as holiday trip. On 05.10.2008 he approached the opposite parties and asked to book Air Tickets for six persons for the above places and paid Rs.1,19,850/-. He preferred the journey date between 01.12.2008 to 15.12.2008 for a period for three days. Thereafter he requested the opposite parties to extend the period of trip for four days and paid additional amount of Rs.30,000/- through cheque dated: 25.11.2008. The complainant and his Colleagues made preparations to go to the above places and produced the copies of pass-ports to the opposite parties well in advance as demanded. But on 05.12.2008 the opposite parties issued a letter stating that, they regret to inform that they have cancelled package to Thailand due to their concern for the safety of the complainant and his Colleagues because of volatile political situation there and that the complainant is entitled to seek refund of the full amount paid at the time of booking. The issue raised by the opposite parties in the letter dated: 05.12.2008 was cleared on 03.12.2008 itself as published in the “Times Of India” dated: 04.12.2008. In spite of it, the opposite party cancelled the booking and caused much inconvenience to the complainant and his colleagues. After cancelling the trip on 05.12.2008 the opposite party did not refund the amount collected and for that purpose the complainant had to repeatedly visit the ops but the same was in vain. After the lapse of 11 days the opposite party issued two cheques one for Rs.2,100/- and the other for Rs.1,19,850/- both dated: 16.12.2008. The sum of Rs.1,19,850/- was paid to the opposite parties on 05.10.2008 and the refund was made on 16.12.2008 that too by way of cheques. Therefore the opposite parties are liable to pay interest on the said amount at the rate of 3% per month. The five Colleagues of the complainant were not having pass-ports and therefore they struggled a lot to get the same. Because of the stringent process of the pass-port authority it is very difficult to get the pass-port. The Colleagues of the complainant struggled very much to get the pass-ports and they paid Rs.12,500/- as pass-port fees and commission. Due to the pre-scheduled trip the complainant and his Colleagues had not taken any work during the period from 01.12.2008 to 15.12.2008 that came from different clients. As a result the complainant and his Colleagues lost the work to the extent of Rs.5,00,000/-. As per the terms and conditions of the opposite parties if the booked tickets are cancelled by the customers ten days before the date of departure, the cancellation charges will be at 75% of the booking amount and if the cancellation is made seven days before the date of departure the cancellation charges will be at 100%. Applying those terms and conditions since the opposite party cancelled the booking seven days before the date of departure, the opposite party is liable to pay additional amount of Rs.1,19,850/- in addition to the booking amount of Rs.1,19,850/-. But the opposite party paid only Rs.2,100/- apart from Rs.1,19,850/-. The other five Colleagues of the complainant are from Rural Areas and for the first time they had undertaken Foreign trip. They had informed the same to the members of their family, but the cancellation of the trip landed them in disrepute and thereby they were defamed before the relatives and the family members. As a result the complainant and his Colleagues had suffered severe mental and physical agony and as such, the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-. Hence the complaint.

2. In the version the contention of the opposite parties is as under:-
The opposite parties are in the vocation of arranging package tours and travels to various places around and across the globe. They had arranged the trips to Bangkok and Pattaya in December-2008. In pursuance to paper notification, the complainant filed requisition form on 05.10.2008 requesting for booking of the three days trip to Bangkok and Pattaya between 1st and 15th December 2008. Along with requisition form the complainant paid Rs.1,19,850/-. Subsequently at the 11th hour the complainant preferred for extra one day stay and paid additional amount of Rs.30,000/- through cheque dated: 25.11.2008, but the said cheque has been dishonored. Due to volatile political situations in Bangkok, the International Airport at Bangkok was closed by Anti Government Protestors since November 2008. As a result the passengers were stranded in the airport without food and shelter. Therefore in the interest of the customers and in good faith they cancelled the package to Bangkok and Pattaya and informed the complainant through letter dated: 05.12.2008. Subsequent to the said letter the complainant sought for refund of the amount and the same was returned with interest on 16.12.2008. Since the trip was cancelled due to unavoidable circumstances beyond their control they were not liable to pay any interest. However they paid Rs.2,100/- towards interest due to the pressures and threats exhorted by the complainant. The payment of interest was also to avoid further litigations. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties as the trip was closed or cancelled due to closure of the Airport at Bangkok which was beyond the control of the opposite parties and as a result of cancellation of the trip they also suffered huge loss. The refund was made soon after the requisition from the complainant in that regard. The contention that the Colleagues of the complainant struggled hard to get the pass-ports and spent Rs.12,500/- is false. Any individual applying for pass-port is liable to pay requisite fee fixed by the Government Of India, but paying of commission is alien to the pass-port issuance procedure. The claim for Rs.5,00,000/- towards loss of work is preposterous and illogical. They are not liable to pay Rs.1,19,850/- as claimed in Para-10 of the complaint and compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- as claimed in Para-11 of the complaint. They are also not liable to pay Rs.12,500/- stated to be spent by the Colleagues of the complainant for obtaining pass-ports. On these grounds the opposite parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3. In support of the respective contentions, both the parties have filed affidavits. The learned counsel for the complainant has filed written arguments. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the complainant.

4. The points for consideration are:-
(1)Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

(2)Whether the complainant entitled to the relief prayed for in the complaint?

5. Our findings on the above points are in the Negative for the following:-

REASONS

POINT Nos. 1 & 2:-
6. Admittedly the complainant booked the tickets for the Package Tour to Bangkok and Pattaya on his behalf and on behalf of his five Colleagues. It is the Colleagues of the complainant who spent Rs.12,500/- for obtaining the pass-port. The complainant and his Colleagues together sustained loss of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of not taking the work during the period from 01.12.2008 to 15.12.2008. The compensation of Rs.6,00,000/- is claimed towards the physical and mental agony suffered by the complainant and his Colleagues. In spite of it, the other Colleagues have not joined the complainant in filing the complaint. The complainant himself has filed the complaint claiming the relief’s on his behalf and on behalf of his Colleagues. In view of what is provided in Section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act without permission of the Forum the complainant is not entitled to file the complaint on behalf of his Colleagues. Section 12(1)(c) of the Act provides that, a complaint may be filed by one or more consumers where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, with the permission of the District Forum, on behalf of, or for benefit for all the consumers so interested. Therefore when the complainant wanted to file the complaint not only on his behalf but also on behalf of his Colleagues it was necessary to obtain permission as provided in Section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act. Since no such permission is obtained, on this ground alone the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

7. Admittedly the opposite party cancelled the trip on account of volatile political situation in Thailand during the relevant period. The fact that there was such a situation in Thailand during the relevant period on account of Anti Government activities is not denied. From the paper clippings produced by the opposite party along with the version it is seen that from November-2008 itself the supporters of the People’s Alliance of Democracy had gained control over the airport at Bangkok and as a result thousands of passengers had been left stranded at the airports. The same situation prevailed even during December-2008. Therefore it was not safe for the Foreigners to visit Thailand during that period. It is in those circumstances in the interest of the passengers the opposite party cancelled the trip scheduled between 01.12.2008 and 15.12.2008. The situation that prevailed in Thailand during the said period was beyond the control of the opposite party and as such, the act of the opposite party in cancelling the trip cannot be said to be without any reason and therefore it will not amount to deficiency in service. The news item in ‘Times Of India’ dated: 04.12.2008 is not sufficient to show that the situation in Thailand was favourable for the persons visiting the country between 01.12.2008 and 15.12.2008. After cancelling the trip as per the letter dated: 05.12.2008 the opposite party refunded the sum of Rs.1,19,850/- to the complainant through cheque dated: 16.12.2008. Besides the refund of the amount paid towards the trip the opposite party also paid Rs.2,100/- towards interest thereon. That being so, we are unable to make out any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. There appears no logic in claiming another sum of Rs.1,19,850/- from the opposite party besides the refund of the entire amount paid as has been claimed in Para-10 of the complaint. No supporting material is produced to show that the complainant and his colleagues suffered loss of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of not taking the work during the period from 01.12.2008 to 15.12.2008. Even assuming for the sake of argument that the complainant and his Colleagues suffered loss of Rs.5,00,000/- by not taking any work during the above period and they were also subjected to mental agony on account of cancellation of the trip, the liability in this regard cannot be fixed on the opposite parties, because the opposite party cancelled the trip on account of the circumstances beyond their control. Therefore we are unable to find any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and as such, we hold that, the complainant is not entitled for the relief prayed for in the complaint. In the result, we pass the following:-

ORDER

8. The complaint is dismissed with costs of Rs.2,000/- to the opposite parties.

9. Send a copy of this order to both the parties free of costs immediately.

10. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 17th DAY OF MARCH 2009.

-Sd/- -Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT