BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::
KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT
PRESENT SRI V.C. GUNNAIAH, B.Com., M.L., PRESIDENT
SMT. K. SIREESHA, LADY MEMBER
Tuesday, 08rd November 2016
CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 45 / 2016
1. Srikakulam Ramaiah Chetty, S/o Krishnaiah Chetty,
Hindu, aged about 55 years, Business.
2. S. Ganga Maheswari, W/o Ramaiah Chetty, Hindu,
aged about 50 years, House wife.
Both are residing at D.No. 3/550-A, Ayyappa Nagar,
Aravinda Asramam Road, YMR Colony, Proddatur town,
Kadapa District. ….. Complainants.
Vs.
Cox and Kings, Rep. by Sales Officer, K. Subramanyam,
20-3-25, Opp. Vodaphone Office, Siva Jyothi Nagar,
Tirumala Bypass Road, Tirupati Town, Chittoor District. ………Opposite party
This complaint coming on this day for final hearing on 01-11-2016 in the presence of Sri M. Sarat Chandra Reddy, Advocate for Complainant and Sri M. Nagi Reddy, Advocate for Opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-
O R D E R
(Per Smt. K. Sireesha, Member),
1. Complaint filed under section 12 of C.P. Act 1986.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:- It is submitted that the Complainants are husband and wife and they residing in Proddatur town, Kadapa district. The Complainants after seeing the Opposite party’s advertisement in news papers approached the Opposite party and enquired the travels details available through the Opposite party company. The Complainants have selected Scandinavian Delight with Russia 15 nights / 16 days (Scan) and they have totally paid Rs. 3,42,500/- on 20-3-2014. The Opposite party had issued cash receipt for the above amount and the Complainant handed over their Indian passports for further proceedings. As per tour plan the tour will started from 19-5-2014 to 3-6-2014. As per advice of the Opposite party the Complainants reached Hyderabad on 18-5-2014 at the Airport the Opposite party representative by name Santoshi handed over the Complainants passports. The Opposite party’s representative in formed the Complainants the VISA for Russia trip will be handed over in Finland. Complainants believed the words of the Opposite party proceeded and continued with tour plan. The Complainants and other travelers from the Opposite party company toured as per schedule given by the respodnnet. The Complainants submits that after reaching Finland the Complainants have not received VISA as per promise and the Complainants only held up in Finland due to the negligence of the Opposite party. The Complainant enquired and tried to get information from the Opposite party to proceed to Russia. But, no response from the Opposite party. The Opposite party violated the contract of tour and showed deficiency in service to the Complainants. The Complainants mentally harassed and they developed mental tension after other members in tour had preceded Russia. The Complainants in helpless position and nobody cooperated with them in Finland had hired vehicle and proceeded to Airport to departure from Finland to India. After reaching Hyderabad nobody came to Airport and enquired them.
3. It is further submitted that without any fault on behalf of the Complainants, the Complainants returned from the tour without seeing Russia as per plan. The Opposite party even before departure from Hyderabad promised to the Complainants that they will tour in Russia. The Opposite party simply send the Complainants without proper documents of the tour, returned them without their fault. The Opposite party willfully defaulted to provide service as per their promise and breached the contract. Without seeing Russia the Complainants lost their opportunities and the Complainant could not able to see Russia separately. The loss of seeing Russia will not be compensated with money, but the Complainant submits that it could not be happened to other by breaching the contract. The Complainants submits that the Complainants lost nearly Rs. 1,00,000/- each and the Complainants are claiming Rs. 2,00,000/- for the loss of seeing Russia and also Rs. 50,000/- each towards damages and fro mental agony.
4. It is submitted that the Complainant demanded the Opposite party for repayment of the tour amount relating to Russia and non cooperation of the Opposite party in the tour. The Opposite party not responded for the demand of the Complainants and finally the Complainants have issued legal notice dt. 21-1-2015 to the Opposite party. The Opposite party received the notice and replied partly and not responded so far.
5. The Complainants therefore, prays that the Hon’ble forum be pleased to allow the Complaint and direct the Opposite party (i) directing the Opposite party to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- towards the amount for the loss of tour with interest, (ii) directing the opposite party to pay compensation for damages and for mental agony for Rs. 50,000/- and (iii) to grant such other and further releif’s as the Hon’ble forum deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the complaint.
6. Written version filed by the Opposite party. As per terms and conditions accepted and agreed by the Complainants and therefore jurisdiction of the civil courts are barred. Hence, this Hon’ble District Consumer forum has no jurisdiction to entertain he complaint. The Opposite party registered office located at Mumbai. The Opposite party is franchise office and not a legal entity and incapable of being sued. The present complaint is liable to be dismissed. The Opposite party denies paras – 3 & 4 of the complaints decided to book the Scandinavian Delight with Russia Tour schedule to depart on 19-5-2014 with the Opposite party. They were aware that granting or rejecting the visa is a sole discretion of the consulate and not the Opposite party. The Opposite party submits that the Complainants enjoyed their Scandinavian tour on 12 days and could not avail 4 days of their Russia tour as their Visa application was not processed by the consulate. In para – 5 & 6 of the complaint that the Opposite party denies the contents of the legal notice dt. 1-1-2015. The Opposite party contentions that the present forum has jurisdiction to try and entertain this matter. Therefore, prayed t hat this complaint may be rejected on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. The complaint may be dismissed with exemplary costs.
7. On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination.
- Whether the complainants are eligible for compensation as prayed by them or not?
ii. Whether there is negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite party or not?
iii. To what relief?
8. On behalf of complainant Exs. A1 to A4 were marked and on behalf of O.P.2 Exs. B1 & B2 were marked.
9. Point Nos. 1 & 2. As seen from complaint, counter, Exhibits and record it is very clear that the Complainant had paid amount to the opposite party for Scandinavian tour delight with Russia 15 nights under Ex. A1. Ex. B2 proves the same. When the opposite party had collected large amount from the Complainants for tour package it is bounded duty of the opposite party to arrange all facilities to the Complainants being an agent of the Cox and Kings Ltd., Tourists Company. The opposite party himself is responsible to make all the arrangements being an agent duty of the opposite party to see all the Visas and other permission for his tourists. Here the opposite party utterly failed to do so. After 12 days tour of Scandinavian the Complainants were intimated that had no permission to go to Russia and their Visa was rejected. It shows gross negligence on the part of the opposite party, being the aged people how they can return from Scandinavian to India. When the Opposite party collected huge amount from Complainants it is the bounded duty to arrange all facilities to the tourists being the agent of the Cox and Kings Ltd., Tourists Company. So it is very clear that there is gross negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite party and failed to take Complainants to Russia tour so they are liable to compensation as prayed by the Complainants.
10. Point No. 3. In the result the complaint is allowed, directing the Opposite party to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) towards the amount for the loss of tour, pay Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousands only) towards mental agony, pay Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards cost of the complaint to the Complainant, within 45 days of date of receipt orders.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 8th November 2016.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
For Complainant : NIL For Opposite parties : NIL
Exhibits marked for Complainant: -
Ex: A1 P/c of cash voucher, dt. 20-3-2014.
Ex. A2 P/c of tour plan dt. 20-3-2014.
Ex. A3 O/c of legal notice dt. 21-1-2015.
Ex. A4 Reply of Opposite party dt. 29-1-2015.
Exhibits marked on behalf of the Opposite party : -
Ex:B1 Certified copy of Board Resolution, dt. 3-12-2014.
Ex:B2 How to choose our holiday pearls of wisdom important note on visa how to book terms and conditions summer 2014.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to :-
- Sri M. Saratchandra Reddy, Advocate for Complainant.
- Sri M. Nagi Reddy, Advocate for Opposite party B.V.P
