M. Govindarajan,
S/O. G. Murugaiyan,
26, Abiramapuram 4th Street,
Thanjavur – 613 007

M. Vijaya,
W/O. M. Govindarajan,
26, Abiramapuram 4th Street,
Thanjavur – 613 007 Complainants


Versus

Manohar Travels
Represented by Manohar,
1433, Mettur Road,
Swatthik Complex,
Near Abirami Theatre,
Erode – 638 001.

M. Karthik,
Kailash Travels,
11, Veerasamy Street,
First Floor,
Opposite to Pverest Road,
Periyamedu,
Chennai – 600 003. Opposite Parties

Date of Complaint 11.04.2008.

Mr.V. Chandrasekhar Counsel for complainants


Opposite Parties Ex parte.




O R D E R

THIRU.P. ROSIAH, PRESIDENT



Complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act

1986.


  • The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:


The complainants have booked tickets with the opposite parties travel agencies to travel up to Amarnath and paid advance amount of Rs. 6,000/- for the journey on 29.03.2006. Since the 2nd complainant was suffering from Orthritis pain and was unable to undertake the tour, the complainants have informed the opposite parties to cancel the tour travel one week before the commencement of the tour through France Express Net Work Pvt. Ltd. Thanjavur. Since the complainants have cancelled the tour programme, they are entitled to get back the advance amount of Rs. 6,000/- from the opposite parties. But the opposite parties have not returned the advance amount to the complainants. By not returning the advance amount, the opposite parties committed deficiency of service. Hence the complainants have filed this complaint for recovery of advance amount of Rs.6,000/- compensation of Rs.75,000/- and cost of Rs. 5,000/-.

  • Though the opposite parties were present on receipt of summons, they did not file version even after granting 381 days time. Hence the opposite parties 1 and 2 were set ex parte.
  • Complainants have filed Proof Affidavit. Ex.A1 to A9 were marked in the side of the complainants.
  • The points that arises for consideration are:


  • Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the

Opposite parties?

  • To what relief the complainants is entitled to?


  • PointNo:1

The complainants have booked for the pilgrimage to Amarnath and remitted Rs.6,000/- as advance with the opposite parties travel agencies. The complainants could not proceed the pilgrimage due to personal problems. The complainants have requested the opposite parties to return the advance amount paid by them after deducting the cancellation charges. Ex.A8 is the letter written by the Ist complainant to the opposite parties. But the opposite parties did not file version rebutting the contention of the complainants in the complaint. They have not filed any documents to show that, if the journey is cancelled the complainants are not entitled to refund the advance amount. The documents filed by the complainants would go to show that they have paid Rs. 6,000/- as advance to the opposite parties to take up pilgrimage to Amarnath through the travels conducted by the opposite parties. It is seen from Ex.A8 that the complainants have not undertaken the pilgrimage and the fact was informed to the opposite parties well in advance. But the opposite parties failed to return to the advance amount to the complainants. In the absence of contra evidence, the case of the complainant has to be accepted and we are of the view that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.

  • Point No:2

In the result, the complaint is allowed. The Opposite parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to refund the advance amount of Rs.6,000/- to the complainants after deducting the cancellation charges. The opposite parties also directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as cost of the complaint to the complainants. The amount shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum till the date of payment.