Mr. Justice Lokeshwar Prasad, President—The present appeal, filed by the appellant, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) is directed against order dated 21.2.2002, passed by District Forum, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi in Complaint Case No. TC-2983/1998 entitled Shri Raj Dutta & Ors. v. Garwal Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd.

2. The facts, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal, briefly stated, are that the respondents Shri Raj Dutta and five others had filed a joint complaint before the District Forum under Section 17 of the Act, averring therein that acting upon the various advertisements and representations, made by the appellant, the respondents got booked six seats with the appellant after making a payment @ Rs. 3,045/- per seat to the appellant for Delhi-Kedarnath-Badrinath tour which was to commence from Delhi from 30.5.1994. The tour for which the booking was done was to be organised by the appellant and the duration of the tour was for eight days. It was stated in the complaint filed by the respondents that in the advertisements and representations made by the appellant it was represented that the appellant would offer excellent facilities for the above said package tour from Delhi to Kedarnath and Badrinath, covering most important places en-route and the journey was to be performed in comfortable Delux 19 seater buses. Accommodation was also assured in double bed rooms with running hot water. It was stated that the appellant had provided a 19 seater bus only for the first part of journey from Delhi to Kedarnath on 30.5.1994. The rest of the journey was undertaken in an old and dilapidated bus, causing discomfort and harassment to the respondents/complainants. It was stated that even the accommodation provided to the complainants at the places of halts was not proper and only dormitory accommodation was provided to the complainants. It was stated that at Kedarnath the accommodation provided to the complainants was in a private lodge with small rooms which were dark and dingy and that too without any electricity. At Rudraprayag respondents/complainants were provided only six rooms for 19 persons which was hardly sufficient for 19 persons.

3. It was stated that on return from the aforesaid tour a letter was addressed to the appellant informing the appellant about all the inconvenience, harassment, agony and sufferings undergone by the respondents during the tour due to negligence and default in service on the part of the appellant. It was further stated that the appellant gave a reply on 16.6.1994 expressing regrets for inconvenience caused and assuring that some amount would be refunded to the respondents/complainants after receipt of instructions from the Managing Director. It was stated that despite the above assurance no further action was taken by the appellant.

4. In the complaint, filed by the respondents/complainants, it was prayed that the appellant be directed to pay the complainants a sum of Rs. 51,217/- together with interest @ 18% per annum besides the cost of litigation. It was also prayed that the appellant be directed to discontinue and not to repeat the unfair trade practice of making any representation or assurance as to the quality or usefulness of the services relating to package tours offered by the appellant.

5. The claim of the respondents/complainants in the District Forum was resisted by the appellant. In the reply/written version filed on behalf of the appellant it was stated that the appellant was a Govt. of Uttar Pradesh Undertaking and was engaged in the business of organising package tours to holy shrines and various other places. It was stated that no false promise/representation was made by the appellant to the respondents. Denying the allegations levelled by the respondents/complainants it was stated that there was no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the appellant and that the complaint filed by the respondent