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
Wednesday the 27th day of March 2024
CC.356/2022
Complainant
Mansoor.P.P,
Pulparambil House,
Puthoor Post, Omassery,
Kozhikode – 673 582.
Opposite Party
Valorah (Resorts and Hospitality),
331, 3rd Floor,
Iscon Emporio,
Satelite, Ahmedabad,
PIN- 380015.
ORDER
By Sri. V. BALAKSRISHNAN – MEMBER
This is a complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
- The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:
The complainant purchased a membership card from the opposite party with 3 year validity in June 2021. The company representative offered him 15 nights stay with dinner and breakfast and hassle free booking in luxury resorts. After paying Rs. 42,000/-, he came to know that the opposite party had cheated him. In the year 2021, the opposite party was contacted for a holiday trip to the resorts about 50 times, but there was no favourable reply. After 3 months discussion, finally they gave a chance in the resort located at Munnar. At the time of purchasing the membership card the opposite party’s offer was to provide service for five days in each year for 2 adults and 3 children. In the year 2021 he was given only 2 days of accommodation in Munnar resorts. In the year 2022 even though booking attempts were made in the company website several times since 19/03/2022 there was no favourable reply and all requests were refused. Even the emails were sent for booking in available destination according to companies choice and dates, there was no response at all. His request for resort booking on 25/09/2022 in opposite party’s website is still pending. The complaint made by him in consumer help line portal of the opposite party is not responded yet.
- The complainant has approached this Commission to get a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the deficiency of service of the opposite party.
- The opposite party was set ex-parte.
- The points that arise for determination in this complaint are;
1) Whether there was any deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party, as alleged?
2) Reliefs and costs.
- Evidence consists of the oral evidence of the PW1 and Exts A1, A2 and A3.
- Heard the complainant.
- Point No 1 : in order to substantiate his case, the complainant got himself examined as PW1. PW1 has filed proof affidavit and deposed in terms of the averments in the complaint. Ext A1 is the product details offered by opposite party, Ext A2 is the membership details of the complainant issued by the opposite party, Ext A3 series are the payment details made to the opposite party and e-mail communication from the opposite party’s representative. It is averred in the affidavit that Rs. 42,000/- was paid and the company representative had offered 15 nights stay with dinner and breakfast.
- The allegation of the complainant is that the Hospitality Service of opposite party was purchased by him for period of 3 years after paying the consideration of Rs. 42,000/-. He was able to receive an accommodation only after 3 months and given 2 days stay at Munnar denying the earlier offer of 5 days. There after no favourable reply was received for his attempt to book a resort in other places. Even his request to book any resort as per their choice was not attended.
- From A3 series it is clear that, payment was received by opposite party and membership was offered with discount of Rs. 3,000/-
- The evidence of PW1 stands unchallenged. The opposite party had not turned up to state his version and chose to remain ex-parte. No contra evidence is there. Deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party stands proved by the testimony of PW1 and Exts A1 to A3 series. It is true that the complainant had suffered the financial loss, hardship and mental stain. Hence he is eligible for compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for the hardship, financial loss and mental agony suffered.
- Point No. 2:- In the light of the finding on the above point, the complaint is disposed of as follows;
a) CC.356/2022 is allowed in part.
b) The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) as compensation to the complainant for the financial loss, hardship and mental agony suffered.
c) The payment as afore stated shall be made within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the amount of Rs. 50,000/- shall carry an interest of 6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment.
d) No order as to costs.
Pronounced in open Commission on this, the 27th day of March, 2024.
Date of Filing: 20/12/2022
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant :
Ext A1 - Product details offered by opposite party,
Ext A2 - Membership details of the complainant issued by the opposite party,
Ext A3 series - Payment details made to the opposite party and e-mail communication
from the opposite party’s representative.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party
NIL
Witnesses for the Complainant
PW1 - Mansoor. P.P (Complainant)
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
True Copy,
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar.
