State Commission's Unilateral Alteration Of District Forum Order Is A Material Irregularity: NCDRC

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Dr. Inder Jit Singh, held that the State Commission cannot suggestively alter a District Forum's well-reasoned order unilaterally without the complainant's consent Brief Facts of the Case The complainant paid Rs. 12,000 in cash and Rs. 41,392 by cheque for a tour package from Aryan Travel Point/Travel Agency. Upon receiving the air tickets, they discovered discrepancies, including the return ticket being issued on SpiceJet Airlines instead of the promised Indian Airlines. Additionally, no details were provided about the hotel or contact person in Srinagar. Upon arrival, nobody was there to receive them, forcing the complainant to arrange their own accommodations and transportation at extra cost. The return journey was also disrupted, resulting in additional expenses. Consequently, the complainant filed a consumer complaint in the District Forum. The District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the travel agency to pay Rs. 41,002, after deducting Rs. 12,390 for the air journey from the booking amount. Additionally, the agency was directed to reimburse Rs. 63,500 spent by the complainant on extra expenses and to pay Rs. 2,50,000 in compensation. Aggrieved by the District Forum's order, the Travel Agency appealed to the State Commission of Delhi, which modified the District Forum's order. The State Commission ordered the Travel Agency only to pay Rs. 72,000. Consequently, the complainant filed a revision petition before the National Commission. Contentions of the Travel Agency The travel agency contended that they never dealt directly with the complainant but with the group's representative, who acted on behalf of ten people. They denied receiving Rs. 12,000 in cash from the complainant, stating that the representative paid Rs. 30,000 in advance by cheque. The agency collected Rs. 41,392 from the complainant per the representative's instructions and received another cheque of Rs. 54,388 from the representative for the remaining balance. They claimed the e-tickets were given to the representative, and there was no promise of an Indian Airlines flight. Details about the hotel and local contact were provided to the representative, the sole point of contact. According to the agency, the group was received at Srinagar Airport and taken to the hotel but left without notice. The local agent couldn't find them, and the representative later said the group wouldn't stay at the hotel or use the package and that his cheque would not clear. After notifying the representative and waiting two days, the agency canceled the return tickets. It was argued that the complainant's sufferings were due to the group's failure to pay the balance and not due to any negligence on their part. Observations by the National Commission The commission observed that the District Forum had given a well-reasoned order and agreed with its observations and findings. In contrast, in the appeal filed by the travel agency, the State Commission did not thoroughly examine the case's merits. The commission highlighted that it was evident from the State Commission's observations, which suggested that the travel agency pay Rs. 63,500 was spent by the complainant as an additional amount, noting that the complainant had already used one side of the airline service. The State Commission found the Rs. 2,50,000 compensation excessively high and modified the order to have the travel agency pay Rs. 63,500 in total. The travel agency had already deposited Rs. 60,000, which, with interest, amounted to approximately Rs. 72,000, to be released to the complainant. After careful consideration, the commission concluded that the State Commission erred in modifying the District Forum's well-reasoned order based on its suggestion to the travel agency without the complainant's consent. Therefore, the National Commission set aside the State Commission's order and restored the District Forum's order. The travel agency was directed to pay the amount specified by the District Forum with interest at 6% per annum. Case Title: Jai Dev Vs. M/S Aryan Travel Point Case Number: R.P No. 389/2019Click Here To Read/Download Order

State Commission's Unilateral Alteration Of District Forum Order Is A Material Irregularity: NCDRC

Ayushi Rani

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Ayushi Rani

State Commission's Unilateral Alteration Of District Forum Order Is A Material Irregularity: NCDRC

Ayushi Rani

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Ayushi Rani

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers