Territorial jurisdiction of the District Forum under Section 11 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is determined based on the location of business operations and the cause of action, including the acceptance of payment through online transactions.

ORDER

Shri. R.S. Sharma, President - This appeal is directed against the order dated 13/04/2016, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (C.G.) (henceforth called "District Forum") in Complaint Case No.C.C./14/319. By the impugned order, the District Forum, has held that the complainant are having cause of action to file consumer complaint within jurisdiction of the District Forum, Durg (C.G.). The complaint has been filed within territorial jurisdiction of the District Forum, Durg (C.G.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellants (OPs) is a private Tour and Travels Agency in India which is recognised and is running its business in India. It holds a certificate issued from Travel Trade Division of Ministry of Tourism, Government of India for Inbound (at all places of India) and outbound tours from India. The appellants (OPs) offers tour and travel package for the whole of India and ordinarily carries out its business throughout India. They offer their tour package which includes boarding, lodging and travelling anywhere in India. The appellants (OPs) attracts tourist via internet and e-mails and facilitate and accepts payment through e-payment mode meaning thereby through internet online transactions. The respondents (complainants) along with their families who are residents of Bhilai, Chhattisgarh had planned a trip to Kashmir in between 21 - 28th May, 2014, 8 nights (Jammu - Pahalgam - Srinagar - Gulmarg - Srinagar - Katra - Jammu. The respondents (complainants) had sought enquiries regarding tour package for the same from various tour operators through their web portal. The enquiries of the respondents (complainants) were very specific which were categorically relating to the travelling, lodging and boarding. In response to the same, the respondents (complainants) were approached by various tour operators including Cox-n-Kings, Nevalink, Miraj Tours etc. apart from M/s. Holiday Martz Private Limited. That after analysing the offer received by these tour operators, the respondents (complainants) finally selected M/s Holiday Martz Private Limited as it suitably fitted with the specific requirements of the respondents (complainants). The package cost offered by the appellants (OPs), which was agreed to by the respondents (complainants) was finally settled at Rs. 4,96,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Ninety Six Thousand Only). That under bona fide belief that the appellants (OPs) will not compromise with the promises and their services, the respondents (complainants) made payment of 60% advance amount on verbal request i.e. more than the agreed terms and conditions of the package/contract. As per the tour offer, only 50% advance was to be paid by the group (vide e-mail dated 5th April, 2014, 11 : 28 AM). The respondents (complainants) were made to pay the balance amount during the trip by the appellants (OPs). The respondents (complainants) were left with no other option but to pay the balance amount in spite of the poor facilities of the appellants (OPs) due to the fear of being left unattended by the appellants (OPs) at a place which was truly new to the respondents (complainants), who were travelling with their families containing woman and small children. The services provided by the appellants (OPs) were not upto the mark and were very poor. Still the respondents (complainants) were made to pay the promised exorbitant deal amount which seemed huge in comparison to the pitiable services of the appellants (OPs). The details of the deficiency in service committed by the appellants (OPs) are mentioned in Schedule given in para 3.1 of the complaint. That throughout the trip, there was no co-ordination/concern by the appellants (OPs) towards the comfort and safety of the respondents (complainants) and their respective families. The entire co-ordination/communication between the main appellants (OPs)/local appellant/OPs/bus driver and hotels was done by the group compromising the enjoyment of the t