The Thane District Consumer Disputes Appeals Board found a Pune-based travel agency guilty of service failure and ordered it to reimburse the amount taken as an advance, as well as to pay compensation, d ‘a total value of 95,000 rupees, to a tourist.

The copy of the order, which was passed on December 1, was made available on Sunday. In the order, the chairman of the commission Milind S Sonawane and the member Poonam V Maharshi, asked Mukesh Dilip Ahire of “Sab Dekho Duniya Tours and Travels” to reimburse the advance of Rs 75,000 that he had taken from the plaintiff, a resident of Dombivali, with 10% interest from the date of payment (of the amount of the advance).

The complainant’s attorney, attorney Ashwini Sarjine, said the commission also ordered payment of Rs 10,000 each for the complainant’s physical harassment and procedural costs. In her complaint, the woman said that she had booked an eight-day tour package to visit Darjeeling, Gangtok, Peeling and Lachung in June 2018. The cost of the tour was Rs 80,000, of which she paid Rs 75,000. as advance.

The complainant alleged that when she arrived in Darjeeling with her husband, the hotel rooms were leaking and were not clean. Other than that, no food was provided by the hotel. On top of that, the tour operator changed their itinerary without notifying them, causing them difficulties.

Because of this, they had to pay extra money. When they raised the issues with the tour operator, he ignored it, she alleged. The complainant then approached the commission to request reimbursement of Rs 1,04,290 as well as Rs 70,000 for compensation for mental agony and Rs 30,000 for litigation costs.

In the order, the commission observed: “A reading of the complaint lodged by the complainant at the Gangtok police station shows that the opponent changed the route of his tour and, when questioned about it, , did not respond well, which completely disrupted the complainant’s tour, causing harassment. to her and her husband. ”

The commission further stated: “The evidence produced by the complainant on file has not been contested. We find that the opponent not only caused a defect in service, but also engaged in unfair business practices in its dealings with the complainant.”

(To receive our electronic paper daily on WhatsApp, please click here. We allow sharing of the PDF document on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)

Posted on: Monday December 20, 2021 10:22 am IST

Previous

UAE flights: Emirates passengers to EU can now use IATA Travel Pass

Next

Why choose Travel Agency PR to improve your image in the travel industry

Check Also