IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH OF THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADURAI.

PRESENT: THIRU.N. RAJASEKAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER THIRU.S.KARUPPIAH, JUDICIAL MEMBER F. A.No.44/2017 (Against the order made in C.C.No.103/2007 dated 13.01.2016 on the file of the District Forum,Madurai.)

THURSDAY, THE 05^th DAY OF AUGUST 2022 M/s.SOTC Travel Services Private Limited, (Formerly known as Kuoni Travel (India)Private Limited, Having their registered office at

324, Dr.D.N.Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001, Pre:DCW, Centre, Stanrose House, 1^st Floor, New Prabhadesi Road, Prabha devi, Mumbai – 400 025.

And their corporate office at

8^th Floor, Tower A, Urmi Estate, 95, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai – 400 013, Represented through its Manager Appellant/2^nd Opposite Party -Vs-

1. Dr.Subba Chandra Balaji Bhaskaran, S/o Baskaran, Door No.2/476, Gomathipuram, 6th Main Road, Balaji Bhavanam, Madurai – 625 020. 1st Respondent/1st Complainant

2. Tmt.Sri Vidhya Nelavoy, W/o Balaji, Door No.2/476, Gomathipuram 6th Main Road, Balaji Bhavanam, Madurai – 625 020. 2nd Respondent/2nd Complainant

3. SOTC House, Represented through its Manager, 134, Valluvar Kottam High Road, Chennai – 600 034. 3rd Respondent/1st Opposite Party

4. M/s.Balika Tours and Travel Private Limited, Represented through its Manager, 101, West Marret Street, Madurai – 625 001. 4th Respondent/3rd Opposite Party

5. Malaysian Airlines, Represented through its Manager, No.20, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. 5th Respondent/4th Opposite Party Counsel for Appellant/Opposite party-2 : Mr.R.Pandivel, Advocate.

Counsel for Respondents-1&2/Complainants-1&2 : Mr.A.Liakat Ali, Advocate.

Counsel for Respondents-3 to5/Opp.parties-1,3&4 : Served Called Absent.

This appeal coming before us for final hearing on 16.06.2022 and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following:

ORDER

THIRU.S.KARUPPIAH, JUDICIAL MEMBER.

1. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the 2^nd opposite party preferred this appeal against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Madurai dated 13.01.2016.

2. The facts of the complaint is as follows:

The first and second complainants are newly married couple and the first complainant is a doctor. They saw an advertisement made by the opposite parties 1 & 2 about “Malaysian Surprise” tour programme. Allured by the above advertisement they wish to avail the tour programme and approached the 3^rd opposite party, booking agent of first and second opposite parties who are tour operators. They paid total tour amount of Rs.44,000/- through third opposite party to first and second opposite parties. The opposite parties assured that they take necessary steps to get visa for this tour and they also arranged for accommodation food etc., On 24.03.2006 the complainant went to first opposite party office and enquired the visa information and met one Ms.Jenni, an employee of first opposite party. She informed that the’ visa on arrival ’ was arranged for them and when they boarding at Malaysia they will be issued visa. Believing the assurance they went to Airport and obtained boarding passes. However, they were stopped by immigration officials stating that ’visa on arrival’ arrangement is not available at present. Shocked by this and without visa they were unable to fly to Malaysia. This fact was informed to the first opposite party. An officer of the first and second opposite party came to their rescue a little bit late. His effort to send them to Malaysia failed. Then, the complainants were taken to a hotel which was not to their liking. Then, the opposite parties arranged another hotel at Madras and the complainants were asked to stay. Thereafter, they were informed that due to power failure visa was unable to be obtained in time. They also offered another alternative tour programme and requested the complainants to go for Thailand. Since, without going to Singapore as a Honey-Moon trip and returning to their home down ma