Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/325/2019

Uma Mageshwaran, Son of Mr.K.M.Munusamy, No.2/627, Sulthan Ahmed Street, ECR, Neelankarai, Chennai 600 041. - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.M/s.Yatra Travels, Represented by its Director, Mr.Amar Preeth Singh, No.1101, 11th Floor, Tower - - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.Gnana Sekaran

30 Nov 2022

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

 

BEFORE :                  Hon’ble Justice R. SUBBIAH                                        PRESIDENT

 Thiru R VENKATESAPERUMAL                                   MEMBER                        

                      

F.A. NO.325/2019

(Against order in C.C. No.278/2018 on the file of the DCDRC, Chennai (South))

 

DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

 

Uma Mageshwaran,

S/o. Mr. K.M. Munusamy,

No.2/627, Sulthan Ahmed Street,

ECR Neelankarai,

Chennai – 600 041.                                                        … Appellant / Complainant.                                                            

                                                                       

                                                         Vs.

 

1. M/s. Yatra Travels,

Represented by its Director,

Mr. Amar Preeth Singh,

No.1101, 11^th Floor, Tower – B,

Unitech Cuber Park, Sector – 39,

Gurgaon,

Haryana – 122 001.   

 

2. M/s. Yatra Travels,

Represented by its Director,

Having its office at:

No.405, 4^th Floor,

Unitech Cyber Park,  Sector – 39,

Gurgaon,

Haryana – 122 002.   

 

3.  M/s. Yatra Travels,

(Bangalore Office),

Represented by its Director,

Having office at:

No.189/1, First Floor,

Brigade Road,

Bangalore – 560 001.

 

4. M/s. Yatra Travels,

(Chennai Office),

Represented by its Director,

No.90, Basement Floor, Ganesh Towers,

Dr. Radha Krishnan Salai,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.                                            … Respondents / Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for Appellant / Complainant             : M/s. P. Gnanasekaran

Respondents / Opposite parties                    : Called absent

 

This appeal coming before us 30.11.2022 and on hearing the arguments of the appellant and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following:-

 

ORDER

HON’BLE THIRU.  JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT.  ( Open Court).

  

1.       This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant against the order of dismissal passed by the District Commission, Chennai (South) in C.C.No.278/2018, dated 18.09.2019 for non-appearance and for non- filing of proof affidavit of the complainant for a long time.

2.           The appellant herein has filed the complaint as against the opposite parties alleging deficiency of service for the following reliefs:

            (i) to pay a sum of Rs.28,900/- being the ticket charges and the service charges collected from the complainant along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from 03.08.2017 to till the date of realisation.

            (ii) To pay the compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, physical strain and stress  suffered by the complainant with cost.

 

3.         In the said complaint, proof affidavit of the complainant has not been filed for a long time to prove the allegations made in the complaint inspite of sufficient opportunities that were given to him.   Finally when the matter came up on 18.09.2019, the complaint was dismissed for not filing of proof affidavit as well as for non-appearance of the complainant.  Against which, the present appeal has been filed.

4.         Though the conduct of the appellant exhibits the lethargic attitude, when the case had come up for hearing on 25.11.2022 in order to provide an opportunity to the appellant / complainant to prosecute the case on merits, this appeal was allowed on a condition that the appellant shall pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- to be payable to the Legal Aid Account, SCDRC drawn in favour of the Registrar, SCDRC, Chennai on or before 29.11.2022.  

5.         Today, when the matter again appeared in the list, it is reported by the Counsel for appellant that the conditional order has been complied with.  Hence, the order of the District Commission, Chennai (South) in C.C. No.278/2018 dt. 18.09.2019 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the District Commission, Chennai (South) with a direction to restore the complaint on their file.   The District Commission, Chennai (South) is further directed to issue fresh notice to the parties by fixing a fresh date of hearing and on their appearance to proceed with the case in accordance with law. 

            In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Chennai (South) in C.C. No.278/2018 dt.18.09.2019, and the DCDRC, Chennai (South) is directed to restore the compliant on the file for fresh disposal.

The District Commission, Chennai (South) is directed to issue fresh notice to the parties by fixing a fresh date of hearing and on their appearance to proceed with the case in accordance with law on merits.  

 

 

 

 

Sd/-                                                                                                          Sd/-

R VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                 R.SUBBIAH                        

         MEMBER                                                                      PRESIDENT