A.THIRUMARAN Vs. KVM TRAVELINK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complaint filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act- 1986 The details of complaint in brief as follows : Complainant practicing as an advocate in order to travel from Coimbatore to Chennai along with his wife and relatives for the travel on 22.11.09 booked tickets through the 1st opposite party for the travel in A/C sleeper Volvo bus through the 2nd opposite party for which the 3rd opposite party is the authorized signatory and the 1st opposite party licensed travel agent and the complainant paid Rs.2,100/- (Rs.700/- each for 3 persons) for the cost of the ticket and a receipt was issued along with ticket intimating the berth No.4, 5, 6 for the travel on 22.11.09 with a departure time at 9.45 p.m from Coimbatore. When the complainant and his party arrived at 9.00 p.m for the travel on 22.11.09 and waited for boarding the bus there was no sign of arrival or for the arrival of the bus and when approached the 3rd opposite party evaded the proper reply and waited till 10.45 pm and when approached the 3rd opposite party for refund of money he retorted to go and collect the money from the person to whom he has paid and thereby the complainant was forced to travel to Chennai for attending his urgent Court work on 23.11.09 by engaging a private taxi at 11.00 p.m and reached Chennai on 11.00 a.m on the next day by paying a sum of Rs.5,780/- as total hire charges for the car. Hence he had issued a legal notice dated 30.11.09 to the opposite party and there was no reply. Hence the complainant come forward with this complaint claiming for the reimbursement of Rs.2,100/- towards the amount paid for the purchase of booking of tickets for travel and Rs.5,780/- towards the expenditure for the engaging of private car and Rs.25,00,000/- for ill treatment humiliation for the loss suffered for him and for his relatives and for mental agony as compensation and for costs.

(2.) The 2nd and 3rd opposite parties failed to appear before this Commission and they were set exparte in the proceedings.

(3.) The 1st opposite party filed the written version by denying the allegations of the complainant except to admit the arrangements made for relating to the booking of tickets for the travel on 22.9.09 and stated that they issued the receipt for the tickets booked and the amount collected was paid to the 2nd opposite party. Regarding the other allegations relating to the non boarding of bus and other details are all denied as false, baseless and untrue. For the failure to provide bus from Coimbatore to Chennai was by the 2nd and 3rd opposite parties liability cannot be fixed on the 1st opposite party and there was no deficiency in service on the part of the 1st opposite party. The amount claimed by the complainant is exorbitant and excessive. Hence complaint to be dismissed.