DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE
PRESENT : Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB : PRESIDENT
Smt. PRIYA.S, BAL, LLB, MBA (HRM) : MEMBER
Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN, M Tech, MBA, LL.B, FIE: MEMBER
Friday the 04th day of August 2023
C.C.255/2017
Complainant
Mrs.Deepna.P.R
W/o. Sujith.P.S,
Ambadi (H), Palliyol,
Mavoor-P.O,
Kozhikode – 673 661.
(By Adv.Sri.Pavithran.K)
Opposite Party
M/s. Holiday Shop Vacation House
Vellayambalam, Sasthamangalam Road,
Sasthamangalam – P.O,
Thiruvananthapuram – 695 010.
(BY Adv.Sri.T.P.Sudheer Kumar)
ORDER
By Sri.Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN– MEMBER
This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
2. The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:
The complainant is a bank officer who decided to enjoy the travel abroad facility offered to her family by the bank. So she approached the opposite party, a travel consultant, who assured good service and attracting package. As per the invoice sent by the opposite party, she was asked to pay Rs.2,59,000/- for two members including her husband. For giving confirmation of tour, as per email dated 08-05-2017, they demanded an advance payment of Rs.50,000/- for two members. The payment of Rs.50,000/- was done on 09-05-2017. On 17-05-2017 she along with her husband visited Visa Facilitation Services (V.F.S) at Kochi and paid Rs.12,800/- for applying for visa.
3. Confirmation of tour was given on 09-05-2017 by making advance payment. The opposite party took visa appointment date on 17-05-2017 only even though they fixed the date of the tour on 26-05-2017. The visa was approved only on 26-05-2017 and her passport was received only on 07-06-2017. So she was not able to perform her European tour, for which, a lot of initial arrangements were made. When the opposite party was contacted to pay back the advance amount of Rs.50000/- and visa charge of Rs.12,800/-, they were not willing to refund.
4. The opposite party failed to take appointment on an early date as the normal visa processing time at the embassy of Switzerland in New Delhi is 7 to 10 working days. There is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. She has approached this Commission to give direction to the opposite party to refund the amount of Rs.62,800/-being the advance paid and the visa processing charges remitted. Also she seeks compensation of Rs.25,000/-for the false promises, laxity in services and spoiling her time and money.
5. The opposite party filed the version, wherein they have denied all most all the allegations in complaint. It is an admitted fact that visa is to be ensured by the concerned Embassies dealing with emigration or visit by foreign citizen and issue of visa entirely depends upon the description and parameters set out by the concerned departments. The complainant, being an educated bank employee, is aware of the fact that procedures are strictly followed by the consulate and any minute of fault even in any of the document will entail a delay in issuance of visa. Even though the complainant is a responsible bank officer the statement of bank account supplied by her to the concerned consulate was erroneous and insufficient and that was the sole reason for the inordinate delay in the issuance of visa. The opposite party cannot be blamed on any account of undue delay on complainant’s part to secure visa on time and before the commencement of the tour. As per the conditions governing the contract of tour package, the advance of Rs.25,000/- each totalling to Rs.50,000/- is expressly not refundable and the complainant has agreed to the same. Also they had to spent more money on the transportation charges of other passengers as the average pricing varied due to the absence of complainant and her husband. They also had to pay the cancellation charges at Europe for the two members. There is no deficiency of service on their part and the non-issuance of visa in time was only due to the failure of complainant in submitting the proper bank statement along with the documents. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
6. The points that arise for determination in this case are;
(1). Whether there was any deficiency of service on the side of opposite party, as alleged?
(2). Reliefs and costs.
7. Evidence consists of oral evidence of PW1 and Exts.A1 to A9 on the side of the complainant. No oral evidence was adduced on the side of the opposite party. Ext.B1 was marked.
8. Heard. Brief Argument notes were filed.
9. Point No.1 :- According to the complainant, the opposite party had promised to do all the procedures on behalf of the complainant and her family to travel and visit Europe. Ext A2 is the tour package details of the opposite party. Ext A5 is the copy of email sent by the opposite party to the complainant showing the requirements and documents.
10. The complainant was not able to perform the tour as the visa was issued late from the consulate. The point to be considered is whether there was any laxity on the part of opposite party that contributed to the delay of issuing the visa. Ext A5 shows that soon on receiving the advance payment, the complainant was properly informed about the travel requirements and documents. Item 8 of Ext A5 shows clearly that the visa application should include the copies of last 3 years income tax papers. Ext A6 is the email sent to the complainant from Embassy of Switzerland in India which demands the additional documents like income tax return of last 2 years and bank statement reflecting salaries.
11. It is not disputed that all the other applicants in the tour package except the complainant and her husband had procured visa on time. All of them had submitted the visa application on the same day and all of them were given the same information of check lists and general guidelines of visa processing by the opposite party. It may be noted that all others in the tour package were capable of procuring the visa with the same guidelines issued by the opposite party. It was for the complainant to submit all the required documents for getting the visa. No explanation is offered by the complainant for non-submission of all the relevant documents for the timely processing of visa. Without submitting necessary documents, the complainant cannot blame the opposite party. The complainant is an educated lady and a bank employee and it cannot be thought that she was unaware of necessity of furnishing the required documents for the timely issuance of the visa, which is the sole discretion of visa issuing authority. The opposite party has no role in the matter of issuance of visa. That being so, the opposite party cannot be found fault with for the delay in getting the visa.
12. The complainant is seeking the refund of advance amount paid. Going by Ext A2, advance paid is non-refundable. This is clearly mentioned in Ext B1 receipt as well. More over as rightly contended by the opposite party, as a travel agent the opposite party had to make all advance reservations and other arrangements and last minute cancellation has resulted in monetary loss to them.
13. In the absence of any proof of deficiency of service or latches on the part of the opposite party the prayer for refund of advance or visa processing charges or claim for compensation is not allowable.
14. To sum up, we find that there is no proof of any deficiency on the part of the opposite party as alleged and consequently the complaint must fail.
15. Point No. 2 : In the view of the finding on the above point, the complainant is not entitled to get the relief sought for.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed. However, no order as to costs.
Pronounced in open Commission on this, 4th day of August, 2023.
Date of Filing: 11-07-2017.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant :
Ext.A1 – Information regarding cost of Travel and Flight ticket issued by opposite party to the complainant.
Ext.A2 – European Tour programme brochure.
Ext.A3 – Leave sanctioning letter of complainant.
Ext A4 – Email communication of complainant.
Ext A4(a) – Communication dated 26/05/2017 received by complainant from Embassy of Switzerland.
Ext A5 – Copy of email dated 08/05/2017 sent to complainant by opposite party.
Ext A6 – Copy of email sent from V.F.S to complainant.
Ext A7 – Copy of email dated 08/05/2017 sent by opposite party to complainant.
Ext A8 – Copy of email dated 10/05/2017 sent by opposite party to complainant.
Ext A9 – Receipt details of V.F.S.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party
Ext.B1 – Copy of cash receipt of Advance payment.
Witnesses for the Complainant
PW1 - Mrs.Deepna.P.R (Complainant)
Witnesses for the opposite parties
Nil.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
True copy,
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar.
