1. The claimants Dr Javaid Aziz Awan and six others have lodged this claim for recovery of an amount Rs. 4182000/- as compensation/damages with mark up at the rate of 14% per annum due to over charged amount, loss of Friday prayer at Harram Sharif, loss of physical and metal torture loss of reputation of the humiliation and inconvenience with the narration in the claim that the claimants selected Umra Package costing Rs. 53950/- per person for fifteen days and handed over the Passports of the claimants to the defendant No. 4 on June, 3rd 2008, along with a sum of Rs.
377650/- through two cheques dated the same, that the cheques were infavour of World Wide Express Pakistan etc Pvt Ltd (Defendant No. 1) with the assurance by Mr. Tahir Mehmood Defendant No. 4 that arrangements to proceed for Umra would be completed for June 28 to July 11, that the claimants handed over their passports to the said Tahir Mehmood Defendant No. 4 in the third week of June 2008, that the claimant No.1 Dr Javaid Aziz Awan applied for leave from the University w.e.f. 28 June 2008, which was granted but that the booking was made from July 25 (Departure from Lahore), where as the Umra Visa was to expire on July 12. 2008.
2. After under going a period of uncertainty till July 3.2009, the defendants provided tickets, hotel vouchers, enabling the claimants to leave for Umra on July 11.2008, as they had to return from there on July 28.2008, on payment of extra money, that, therefore, their total stay at Harram Sharif was curtailed from 15 days to 30 days which was again inviolation of terms and 2 conditions as settled between the parties. Under such circumstances, the claimants have lodged this claim after delivery of legal notice by the claimant No. 1 on 07.08.2008, through TCS.
3. The defendants have contested the above said claim by filing their statement of defence, inter aria, on the ground that the services provided to the claimants by the defendants were duly according to the terms and conditions settled between the parties and according to policy of Air Line and Saudi Tour Operator.
4. As the matter needed evidence to resolve the controversy, therefore, in support of their claim Dr Javaid Aziz Awan (claimant No. 1) got recorded his statement as PW-1 through his affidavit EXP- PW1/1. In their documentary evidence the claimants have tendered fax dated 30.06.2008, as EXP-P1, notification of University of Agriculture as EXP-P2, notification of University dated 15.07.2008 as EXP- P3, notification dated 16.07.2008 as EXP-P4, OCS request as Mark "A", OCS request as Mark "B".
5. In rebuttal, Tahir Mehmood Sales Manager OCS appeared as DW-1, through his affidavit as EX- DW1/1. In their documentary evidence the defendants have adduced the OCS terms and conditions as EX-D2, OCS terms and conditions as EX-D3, fax as EX-D4 dated 15 May 2008, fax dated 15 July 2008,as EX-D5, historical ticket as EX-D6, historical ticket as EX-D7, historical ticket as EX-D8, historical ticket as EX-D9, historical ticket as EX-D10, historical EX-D11, OCS fax dated 30 June 2008, as Mark "A" OCS rate per person as Mark "B", OCS request for hotel accommodation and transport as Mark "C", photo copy of passport of the claimant as Mark "D", fax as Mark "E".
6. Heard the arguments. Record perused.
7. On critical appreciation of evidence of the parties as on record, it has been squeezed out that only Dr. Javaid Aziz Awan claimant No. 1 delivered legal notice to the defendants but this mandatory requirement was not complied with by the other claimants, that claimants have accepted the package of the defendants for performance of Umra on reading and understanding their terms and conditions, that the fare of Air Line tickets were enhanced on the day of departure of the claimants i.e 11.07.2008.
8. All such facts have been derived from the claimant No. 1 when he was subjected to the weapon of cross examination. It also transpires from the 3 evidence as produced by the defendants that the extra fare prices were charged from the claimants due to increase in fuel price. The increase rate in Air Line tickets and accommodation in Saudi Arabia was Rs. 170700/- but on the request of claimant No. 1, only Rs. 122000/- was charged on which he showed his satisfaction. Ex-D2 is the OCS terms and conditions showing that the rates of the Air tickets are subject to change of fare without prior notice as per Air Line or Saudi Tour Operator's policy. As per condition No. 13 on Ex-D3, the World Wide Express in not to be held responsible for any delay or inconvenience due to delay to their copartners and for any other reason beyond their control. The claimants have been unable to put forth any evidence showing that the inconvenience to them, if any, was due to the faulty services of the defendants exclusively.
9. From the above said criteria of evidence on record, following points are crystal clear; a) As all the claimants have not delivered legal notices in writing as enumerated in section 28 (1) of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005, therefore the claim is not maintainable due to non compliance of this mandatory provision of Law: b) As the enhancement in the Air Line tickets rate was as per policy, terms and conditions, beyond the control of the defendants therefore the defendants can not be held responsible for it: c) The curtailment of period of stay of the claimants at Saudi Arabia was due to unavoidable circumstances therefore the services of the defendants can not be said to be faulty: d) The claimant No. 1 himself waived his right to claim for enhanced ticket rates as he acquiesced to the fare amount Rs. 122000/- therefore the claimants are stopped to claim for any relief in this regard: a) in view of admission of Dr. Javaid Aziz Awan as PW-1 that on return from Saudi Arabia neither he nor any of other claimants remained admitted in the hospital due to nervous shocks as such alleged shocks are not coupled with physical injury and before their can be liability, there must be medically recognized, Psychiatrist illness or medical disorder therefore in the absence of any such circumstance there is no liability for emotional distress or grief.
10. The up shot of whole discussion is that the claimants have been unable to prove their claim against the defendants on factual as well as legal planes, hence, the claim merits dismissal and is hereby dismissed. Fie be consigned to the record room after it due completion.