IMPORTANT POINT
Service providers who receive consideration, have direct liability towards service seekers.

ORDER

Sudip Ahluwalia, Member—These Revision Petitions have been filed against the common impugned Order dated 06.01.2023 passed by the Ld. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnataka in Appeal Nos. 449-450/2021 vide which, the Appeals filed by the Petitioners and Respondents were partly allowed and the Order of the District Forum was modified.

2. The facts and question of law involved in these Petitions arise from a single impugned Order involving the same facts. Therefore these Petitions are being disposed off by this common Order. For the sake of convenience, RP/1332/2023 is treated as the lead case, and the facts and nomenclature of the parties enumerated therein are followed.

3. The factual background, in brief, is that the Complainants, a group primarily comprising retired Army pensioners and their spouses, booked a 15-day, 14-night customized Europe tour through the Opposite Parties No. 1 to 4, who held themselves out as experienced travel operators. The Complainants, many of whom are elderly and suffering from chronic ailments, were assured of a safe, comfortable tour with 3-star accommodations near city Centers, appropriate arrangements suited to their age, and full transparency regarding travel and bookings. The Complainants made full payment, including the cost of the tour package, i.e. Rs.2,11,804/- per head, airfare of Rs.59,685/- per head, and additional charges of Rs.1,960/- for Paris Night Tour, all paid into the ICICI Bank account of Kaleidoscope Travel Consultants by the first week of April 2019. However, despite the deteriorating financial condition of Jet Airways, culminating in suspension of its international operations on 15.04.2019, the Opposite Parties failed to disclose the situation to the Complainants and refused to share flight PNR details even after receiving full payment. Eventually, the Opposite Parties disclosed only two PNRs on 16.04.2019 after Jet Airway’s operations had halted and falsely reassured the Complainants that full refunds for the cancelled Jet Airways tickets would be processed without deduction. Thereafter, the Opposite Parties demanded further payments for alternate return flights without refunding the amounts paid for the earlier Jet Airways bookings. When the Complainants pursued the matter with Jet Airways and IATA, it emerged that Jet Airways had processed the refunds and the agents, i.e., the Opposite Parties were liable to pass them on to the Complainants. The Complainants allege that the Opposite Parties may not have even paid the full ticket amounts to Jet Airways, given the IATA’s weekly BSP (Billing and Settlement Plan) mechanism.

4. In addition to the cancellation issue, the Complainants also raised serious concerns about the substandard execution of the tour. The services provided deviated grossly from the agreed terms. No proper meals were provided, bottled water was denied, visa documents had to be collected personally by the Complainants, accommodations were far from city Centers, and the elderly group was made to walk extensively and use public transport despite prior assurances. Moreover, additional charges collected for tips, i.e. 75 Euros per head and for the Flamenco show being 35 Euros per head were either not utilized or the service was severely deficient. In particular, the Flamenco show was nearly over by the time the group arrived, after a long forced march, an outcome attributed to the Opposite Parties’ inexperience and mismanagement. On the final day, the Opposite Parties announced that refunds had been processed for Delhi-based members and were expected shortly for Bangalore members, but no refund materialized.

5. Repeated representations and follow-ups via WhatsApp, Email, and in person were met with evasion. A Legal Notice was gotten issued by the Complainants on 28.09.2019 demanding refund and compensation, but it was returned with the remark ‘refused’, and no reply has ever been filed by the Opposite Parties. The Complainants assert that the