1. The facts deciphering this case, in nutshell, as put forth in the body of the claim are that the claimant alongwith his two family members Mst. Safiya Kousar (Wife) and Mst. Rashida Begum
(Aunt) got the Umra package from Al-Riaz Anwar Travel Pvt Ltd in the month of August 2008, in pursuance of which the claimant and his above said family members were to be provided fourteen days stay in hotel, transport, return air ticket from Faisalabad to Jeddah via Karachi in lieu of consideration of amount Rs.70000/- per head. Under such package, the claimant paid an amount Rs.210000/- to Muhammad Arshad Riaz Proprietor of Al-Riaz Anwar Travel Pvt Ltd, in presence of Muhammad Mansha S/O Khushi Muhammad and Ghafoor Ahmad S/O Ali Muhammad and also delivered three passports, ID cards etc to the said Muhammad Rashid also. However, the defendant No.1 received further amount of Rs.18000/- in extra. While handing over the travelling documents, passports, air tickets and hotel reservation voucher to the claimant on 04.09.2008, the defendant No.1 ensured that Zafar Iqbal (defendant No.3), his agent, would receive the claimant and his family members in Saudi Arabia. As such, the claimant alongwith his family members went to Saudi Arabia for performance of Umra on 05.09.2008, and as soon as he alongwith two ladies alighted in Saudi Arabia, Zafar Iqbal the defendant No.3 took in to his possession the three passports but he refused to provide hoteling facility and transport. After performance of Umra, the claimant demanded the passports and return tickets from the said Zafar Iqbal when he was told that the passports had been lost. There after, the said Zafar Iqbal disappeared, hence, the claimant had to arrange for renewal of the passports with the expenses of 1050 Saudi Riyals during which he had also to stay in Saudi Arabia for five days extra costing him further expenses of fifteen hundred Saudi Riyals. Under such circumstances, the claimant returned to Pakistan on 28.09.2008, when he demanded his passports alongwith ID cards and 2550 Saudi Riyals and extra amount of Rs.18000/- from the defendant No. 1 but he refused, hence, after delivery of legal notice, the claimant has lodged this claim for recovery of an amount of Rs.1048000/- as extra charge amount, expenses incurred by him for extra stay in Saudi Arabia after performance of Umra, expenses for renewal of emergency passports, mental torture, and legal expenses.
2. The defendants have vehemently opposed the above said claim by filing their statement of defence with the contention that they had provided all the facilities and amenities as mentioned in the voucher to the claimant and his two compani mates but that he has falsely lodged this claim to black mail defendants No.1&2 to unduly extort money from them with malafide.
3. As the case needed evidence in view of intricate and complicated matters of law and facts, hence, the parties were directed to produce their evidence in support of their respective versions through their affidavits and the necessary documents to resolve the controversy. In this regard, the claimant has got recorded his statement as PW 1, through his affidavit EX-PW1/1, whereas he has also submitted the affidavit of Ghafoor Ahmad S/O Ali Muhammad and Muhammad Mansha S/O Khushi Muhammad. In his documentary evidence, the claimant has tendered the receipt of Al-Riaz Anwar Travel Pvt Ltd dated nil as EX-P1, hotel voucher Mark "A", and copies of emergency passports Mark "B", to Mark "D". In rebuttal, Muhammad Rashid Riaz the defendant No.1 appeared as DW 1, through his affidavit EXDW1/1 and he has also produced Muhammad Arshad Jamil DW2, through his affidavit EX-DW2/1. He has also submitted affidavit of Pervaiz Muhammad S/O Fazal Muhammad. In his documentary evidence Rashid Riaz defendant No.1 has adduced the copy of revised Umra fares dated 17.04.2008 as Mark "A", revised Umra fares PIA as EX-D1, copies of passenger receipts as Mark "B" to Mark "D", and copy of hotel voucher Mark "E".
4. After conclusion of evidence of the parties, I have heard learned counsel for parties at length and have perused record carefully and inestimably.
5. The claimant has claimed damages from the defendants for contravention of the terms and conditions of Umra package which was an oral agreement in between the parties. However, the claimant has been unable to prove the terms and conditions of this parole contract alleged to have been executed with the defendants No.1&2 as no confidence inspiring evidence has been produced by him in this regard. In cross-examination the claimant has admitted that the defendants charged the PIA fares from him as fixed by the PIA on the day of his departure. From the statement of the defendant No.1, it transpires that the defendants were to provide to the claimant and his family members only one night stay at hotel Dar-e-Moosa (Mark "A") and such fact has also been admitted by the claimant, under such circumstances, the claim to the extent of levy of extra PIA fares and non providence of services by the defendants at Dar-e-Moosa hotel in Saudi Arabia are out of consideration, being not proved.
6. The controversy has now been confined down to the point as to whether Zafar Iqbal (defendant No.3) was the authorized agent of Al-Riaz Anwar Pvt Ltd and whether he was responsible for loss of the claimant's passports during his stay in Saudi Arabia? In this regard, the claimant Nisar Ahmad has categorically stated in para No.5 of his affidavit EX-PW1/1, that the defendant No.1 told him that Zafar Iqbal his agent would be present in Saudi Arabia for providing to him services, that when he alongwith his two lady family members reached at Saudi Arabia on 05.09.2008, the said Zafar Iqbal took into his custody three passports and ID cards that, there after, Zafar Iqbal refused to return such documents to the claimant pretending that the same had been lost that, therefore, the claimant had to incur extra expenses of 1050 Saudi Riyals for issuance of the emergency passports and fifteen hundred Saudi Riyals for stay of extra five days. Mark "A", is the hotel voucher, admitted by the defendants, showing that their contact person in Saudi Arabia was Zafar Iqbal with Ph.No.0506787714. Although Muhammad Rashid DW1 has denied Zafar Iqbal as his agent in Saudi Arabia but Muhammad Arshad Jameel DW2 when subjected to cross-examination admitted his signature on Mark "A", for its issuance and he also admitted Zafar Iqbal as the defendant's agent in Saudi Arabia. So, it has been proved to my entire satisfaction that Zafar Iqbal was the authorized agent of defendant's No.1&2 in Saudi Arabia to deal with the claimant during his stay there and to provide to him the facilities during performance of Umra. There is nothing in rebuttal of the cogent evidence of Nisar Ahmad claimant PW1 except evasive denials on the crucial point that the said Zafar Iqbal agent of the defendant No.1 &2, took into his custody three passports of claimant and his family members but there after refused to return the same pretending that such documents had been lost. All such attending circumstances indicate the defective and faulty service of the defendants causing extra expenses born by the claimant for preparation and issuance of the emergency passports in Saudi Arabia with the observation that the court's have been slow to allow claims for nervous shocks unless they are coupled with physical injury to the claimants as before there can be liability, there must be a recognized psychiatric illness or medical disorder and there is no liability for emotional distress or grief.
7. The upshot of the above whole discussion is that the claimant is held entitled to get 1050 Saudi Riyals as expenses for issuance of emergency passports Mark "B", to "D", from the Saudi Embassy and further amount fifteen hundred Saudi Riyals for extra stay in Saudi Arabia total 2550 Saudi Riyals from the defendants. The claimant is also held entitled to recover an amount of Rs.10000/- as legal expenses from the defendants for dragging him in this litigation. The remaining claim is dismissed. The defendants shall pay the decreetal amount Rs.61000/- in Pakistani Currency to the claimant within a period of thirty days otherwise, they shall be dealt with u/s 32(2) of PCPA 2005.
The claim is disposed of accordingly. File be consigned to the record room after its due completion.