AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS is an original case. The complainant is a Senior Advocate of Orissa High Court and complainant No. 2 is the wife of complainant No. 1. They wanted to visit the country of Kenya on an excursion package tour conducted by the O.Ps. 2 and 3 was the local agent of the O.Ps. 1 and 2. The complainant pursuant to the advertisement and the terms and conditions deposited a sum of Rs. 20,000/- as advance for the journey. After depositing money on 26.4.2001 the complainants were waiting for further instruction in the matter for journey but they were asked by the O.Ps. that they had to produce a certificate of vaccination against yellow fever and this was a pre-requisite for visiting that country. It is their case that such vaccination against the yellow fever was not available anywhere in Orissa but the same was only available in Mumbai.
O.P. No. 3 informed the complainant that this normally is arranged by obtaining certificate of vaccination and this should be arranged by them. The complainant was not prepared to obtain such certificate. Therefore, he offered to cancel the visit to kenya and alternatively they suggested to visit Australia and New Zealand. This the O.Ps. refused stating that the time schedule fixed for Kenya could not be changed to another date nor it could be changed to visit the countries of Australia and New Zealand. Thereafter the complainant cancelled the programme and wanted the refund of Rs. 20,000/- which the O.Ps. did not oblige and hence the case. In the written version the O.P. admitted the booking and payment of advance of Rs. 20,000/-. Their stand is, the complainant was fully aware and was briefed about the tour. It is further their case that this amount was not an advance towards the charges for the journey but was a non-refundable interest-free deposit for which the complainant was not entitled to any refund.
We have heard Mr. G. Mukherjee, the learned Counsel for the complainants and Mr. S.S. Kabi, the learned Counsel for the O.Ps. We have perused the materials on record.
NO doubt in the literature for Kenya Safari Xerox copies which are on record under the heading Visa requirements, it is mentioned that, in order to avail the tour one has to be in possession of yellow fever vaccination certificate. But it is the specific case of the complainant that it was only available in Mumbai. This part of the assertion of the complainant that such vaccination would be only available at Mumbai and not in Orissa is not specifically denied by the O.Ps. Their only plea in this regard is people who undertook tour to Kenya used to arrange such certificate at their own costs. But it goes without saying that the complainants were unable to take up the journey because of this reason alone. This cannot be said to be their fault. If under such unavoidable circumstances, they were unable to undertake their journey not for their own fault it would be fair enough for the Organiser to refund the entire amount since they have not rendered any service against such payment. There is no material to hold except few correspondences addressed to the complainant that they have taken any steps for which they were entitled to retain the money. Therefore, they were liable to refund this amount having not rendered any service. So far contractual obligation is concerned the receipt granted by Sita World Travels does not indicate that it is a non-refundable amount. Rather it is mentioned as advance to Kenya Safari-II. That apart we do not find on record from the side of the O.Ps. that they at any time refused to refund the amount to the demand by the complainant sent by registered letter dated 13.6.2001.
ON hearing the Counsels for both sides and on going through the materials on record, we hold that the complainant is entitled for refund of the amount of Rs. 20,000/- with interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum from 13.6.2001 when he made a demand for refund and there was no response from the side of the other side till payment. No cost. Complaint allowed.