State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Rev. Thich Hanh Ngyuen vs Bakshi Transport Services on 8 August, 2008
IN THE STATE COMMISSION:DELHI IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision: 08-08-2008 Complaint Case No. C-379/2001 Rev. Thich Hanh Ngyuen, P.O. Box No. 14, Bodh Gaya, District Gaya 824231, Bihar. . . . Complainant Versus M/s. Bakshi Transport Services, 468, Lajpat Rai Market, Delhi 110006. . . . Opposite Party CORAM: JUSTICE J.D. KAPOOR, PRESIDENT MS. RUMNITA MITTAL, MEMBER
1. Whether Reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
Justice J.D. Kapoor (Oral)
1. On the allegations of deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party (O.P in short) in not providing the agreed service of transport of three big Coaches as per agreement the complainant has sought compensation of Rs. 50,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment apart from refund of the entire amount of Rs. 2,85,000/- paid to the O.P. and also to pay Rs. 1,80,000/- paid by the complainant to another tour operator in mid way to complete the tour, along with interest @24% on the above amounts.
2. The allegations of the complainant in brief are that the complainant is a Buddhist monk and had hired the services of the O.P for pilgrimage tour of place of Buddhist interest for people from different countries. The tour was to start from Patna, Rajgir (Nalanda), Bodhgaya, Varanasi, Kushi Nagar, Lumbini, Pokhra and finish at Kathmandu ( Nepal). The whole tour was divided into two groups from 6-11-2000 to 19-11-2000 and 20-11-2000 to 5-12-2000 and for this purpose five A.C. Coaches were hired, as the first group consisted of 79 people for which 3 big coaches were required and for the second group which consisted of 36 people, two big coaches were required which was clearly informed to the O.P at the time of signing the contract, and the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 2.00 Lakhs in advance to the O.P. That as per the contract the coaches were to report at Patna airport on 6-11-2000 but they did not report and the 79 people who had arrived by flight had to wait for long and complained of high BP, restlessness and dehydration etc. The complainant had to manage privately to transfer the tourists to the hotel in private taxis and local coaches and incur expenses. The O.P. was to provide three big coaches for the first tour, however, only two big and one small coach were provided and the air conditioner of one of the coaches broke down in the way and the tourists had to make the journey in heat and dust. Further the O.P. was to provide coaches in good condition but the coaches that arrived at Hotel Maurya, Patna looked old and their condition was also not satisfactory. Further that as per contract the complainant made an advance payment of Rs. 2.00 Lakhs and the balance was to be paid after the completion of tour but the drivers blackmailed the complainant on one pretext or the other and since booking in various hotels had been made in advance and the tour could not be abandoned in midway the complainant had no other option but to pay. Also that as per contract the coaches were to report at 7.00 AM on 21-11-2000 for the second tour but the drivers of the coaches left for Delhi leaving behind the entire group stranded at Patna and the complainant had to arrange coaches from other transport companies and pay Rs. 1,80,000/-
3. Besides challenging the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission and also that the complaint is a counter blast of the Notice of demand served by the O.P, the O.P. has come up with the defence that the complainant is a professional tour organizer which he undertakes for earning livelihood and it was not at all a pilgrimage tour. So far as providing of transportation was concerned it was to be strictly as per the terms of the agreement dated 16-10-2000 but the complainant without any reason unilaterally terminated the services of the O.P. on the morning of 21-11-2000 when the drivers and other staff of the buses were threatened to be handed over to the police because they had objected to the buses being taken to Nalanda which was not part of the tour. There was no condition like big coaches or small coaches but only five AC coaches were required by the complainant for the two groups and there was no complaint of any kind whatsoever as otherwise the complainant would not have availed the services for starting the second tour. Further the buses were of latest model and had very plush upholstery and there was no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. and the money paid to the drivers were agreed en-route expenses. Also that the question of refund does not arise at all because in the complaint to the police the complainant himself admits the entitlement of O.P. to the tune of Rs.2,01,000/- which is also a clear indication that the passengers were satisfied with the services provided by the O.P.
4. The complainant has, in support of his claim, produced the following documents:-
a) PW1/A- Contract dated 16-10-2000.
b) PW1/B- Letter of Maurya Hotel, Patna where the buses were to report and did not report.
c) PW1/C&D- Payments made to the Driver on the way as they had run out of money.
d) PW1/E- Copy of bill, which was paid to the subsequent Tour Operator who completed the tour.
e) PW1/F- Complaint to the police made by the complainant.
5. As the aforesaid facts make out a case of grossest kind of deficiency in service causing mental, physical, emotional suffering and financial loss right from the beginning of the tour. At Patna airport the coaches did not report forcing a group of 79 persons to make private arrangements for going to the Hotel. From there, out of three only two coaches were provided. As per the contract O.P. was to provide new and good conditioned coaches but the coaches that arrived at Hotel Maurya, Patna, looked old and their condition was also not satisfactory. The complainant had admittedly paid Rs. 2.00 Lakhs as advance payment as per the contract and the balance was to be paid at the completion of the tour, however, the drivers of the O.P. blackmailed the complainant on one pretext or the other forcing the complainant to pay as hotel bookings were made in advance and the tour could not have been abandoned midway. For the second tour the coaches were to report at 7.00 AM on 21-11-2000 but the drivers of the coaches left for Delhi leaving behind the entire troop stranded at Patna who had to abandon the tour. These are grossest kinds of deficiencies in service. We deem that a lump sum compensation of Rs. 2.00 Lakhs (including the amount of Rs. 85,000/- or so taken by the drivers from the complainant) besides Rs. 10,000/- as cost of proceedings shall meet the ends of justice.
6. The complaint stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
7. Payment shall be made within on month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. Copy of order as per statutory requirement be forwarded to the parties and thereafter the file be consigned to record.
(JUSTICE J.D. KAPOOR) PRESIDENT (RUMNITA MITTAL) MEMBER HK