Date of Filing: 28.02.2019
Date of Order: 26.07.2021
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – I, HYDERABAD
P r e s e n t
HON’BLE Smt. P. Kasthuri B.Com, L.L.M., PRESIDENT(FAC)
HON’BLE Shri K.RAM MOHAN, B.Sc. M.A L.L.B., MEMBER
On this the Monday the 26th day, of July 2021
C.C.No. 79/2019
Between
Jandhyala Suryanarayana,
S/o Late Sita Rama Rao, aged about 60 years,
Occ: Retd Bank Official,
R/o: H.No. 2-3-35/1, Flat No. 402,
Fort House , Amberpet,
Hyderabad- 500013.
2. Jandhyala Bharati,
W/o. Jandhyala Suryanarayana,
Aged about 54 years, Occ: Housewife
R/o.H.No. 2-3-35/1, Flat No. 402,
Fort House, Amberpet, Hyderabad
….Complainants
And
1. M/s. Spicejet Airlines,
Rep. by its managing Director ,
Having head office at : 319,
Udyog Vihar Industrial Avenue,
Phase-4, Gurgaon – 122016
2. M/s Spicejet Airlines
Rep. by its regional manager,
Shop No.1, terminal buildings,
Begumpet,
Hyderabad - 500016
3. M/s. Makemytrip ,
Rep. by its Regional Manager,
1 ABK OlBEEE Plaza,
Road No.1, Opp Care Hospitals,
Midthila Nagar, Banjara Hills,
Hyderabad ….Opposite parties
Counsel for the Complainant : M/s Gopi Rajesh
Counsel for the Opposite party No.1 & 2 : Mr.Y. Venkataramana
Counsel for the Opposite party No.3 : Absent
O R D E R
(By Shri K.RAM MOHAN, B.Sc. M.A L.L.B., MEMBER on behalf of the bench)
1. The above Consumer complaint has been filed U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, by the complainants, praying the District Forum to grant the following reliefs on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, by directing the opposite parties, jointly and severally, to pay to the complainants differential/additional cost incurred in cancellation of tickets and rebooking of tickets for Rs. 29,975/- along with interest @ 18% p.a from the date of payment till its realization, compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- towards mental agony and loss suffered by them, punitive damages for Rs. 5,00,000/- U/s 14(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 and cost of litigation for Rs. 5,000/- and such further or other reliefs as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The complainants state that they purchased flight tickets, from Spice-Jet, Regional Office, Hyderabad (OP.2), whose Head Office is situated at Gurgoan (OP.1), through its Travel Agent, Make My Trip- site, (OP.3) on 31.10.2018 for undertaking onward journey from Hyderabad-Delhi-Srinagar and return journey from Srinagar -Delhi-Hyderabad. The details of the flights concerned are:
FOR ONWEARD JOURNEY: 23.12.2018
Hyderabad-Delhi:
Flight: SG.471.
23.12.2018 flight scheduled time: 16.16.
Delhi to Srinagar:
Connecting Flight of the same OP.1&2, by 10.25 hours from Delhi to Kashmir.
FOR RETURN JOURNEY:
Srinagar-Delhi: Delhi to Hyderabad:
Accordingly, it is stated that they have made arrangements for hotel, return reservations by spending money.
It is stated that on 22.12.2018, an SMS as well as a recorded message stating that there would be a delay for Flight SG.471 which was scheduled to depart by 8.30 hours instead of 16.16 hours.
On contacting and advice tendered by the OP.3, they rebooked tickets through GOIBBO, other Airlines from Hyderabad to Delhi-Srinagar in order to catch the connecting flight of Spice jet at Delhi to Srinagar, without any disturbance.,
Details of Fresh booking tickets through GOIBOBO:
From Hyderabad to Delhi:
Flight No.G.4821, departure at 5.35 hours on 23.12.2018 with arrival timings at Delhi 7.55 hours. Fare paid: Rs.16,858/-
Partial cancellation from Hyderabad to Delhi was not told to be possible and so even for connecting flight from Delhi-Srinagar needed to be cancelled. Having no other alternative and having made arrangements in accordance with the earlier booked tickets, the complainants state that they cancelled the entire booked tickets from Hyderabad to Delhi and for connecting flight from Delhi to Srinagar also. Keeping this in view, it has been stated that for cancellation of this, an amount of Rs.18,352 would be returned by the Travelling Agent of Spice Jet, i.e. Make My Trip, which has been informed by Mr.Nidhi of Customer care of Ops1.&2.
As a result, for fresh booking of Flight tickets for the flight of Spice jet, from Delhi to Srinagar, Ms.Bhavana customer care of Ops1&2, informed the complainant that an amount of Rs.30,000/- plus for two tickets, would be required to be spent for the journey from Delhi to Srinagar. Subsequently, on being informed that the seats in the flight SG.104 were full for the flight from Delhi to Srinagar, which has been stated to depart by 10.25 and they could not do anything in that regard.
Due to delay in scheduled Flight SG.471 on the ground of operational reasons/technical snag, cancellation of booked tickets for both the flights i.e. SG.471 from Hyderabad and SG.104 from Delhi was done on information given by the Ops.1&2. Conversion in this regard by the Ops1 &2 is stated to be available. with the Ops.1&2, for which even an e-mail dated 24.12.2018 was stated to be sent to the Ops.1&2 to preserve the recordings by them, which is stated to corroborate the version of the complainants.
To the surprise of the complainants, the GOIBIBO booked tickets from Delhi to Srinagar for the same flight SG.104 for 23.12.2018, but at higher cost of Rs.31,469/- On the wrong guidance and actions of OP.1&2, the complainants were compelled to spend hefty amount for purchase of flight tickets from Delhi to Srinagar for the same flight SG.104.
The complainants state that due to the delay in scheduled Flight from Hyderabad to Delhi, which is attributed to conscious wrong doing of the Ops 1 &2; and which is stated to amount to unfair trade practice on the part of the Ops 1 &2 and for the same reason, lot of loss and inconvenience has been caused not only to complainants but also to many other travelers, who booked tickets for the same flight, for which they claimed Punitive Damages.
By E-mail dated 24.12.2018, it is stated that the complainants, by stating all the facts of the above, requested the Ops 1 & 2 to refund the amount of Rs.29,975/- towards the difference/additional charges which they spent, due to the deficiency in service and indulgence of unfair trade practice by the Ops.1&2. In the reply e-mail, it is stated that the Ops 1&2 initiated process for refund of Rs.18,,352. The complainants state that on receipt of reply e-mail, immediately they put a mail to the Ops 1 &2, to go through the earlier mail and understand properly otherwise the complainants would approach appropriate Forums for justice. A mail dated 4.1.2019 sent by complainants to the Ops 1 & 2 is stated to show to resolve the issues of the complainants. It is stated that the email dt.5.1.2019 from customer care of Ops 1 &2 to the complainant, that they could not consider the request of the complainant to award compensation. Ex.A.6 is the proof of email reply from the customer care through it was addressed to the Ops 1 &2 with copy to customer care and no reply was given by the Ops 1 &2.
Further, emails to the Ops1&2 and their Nodal Officer, could not resolve the issue of awarding of compensation except by mere offering of only Rs.1,000/- per person. As per the advice of the Ops 1 &2 even sent an email to their Appellate Authorities which could offer only Rs.1,000/- compensation per person and by reiterating the problem of delay in flight is due to operational reasons only. Email (Ex.A.11) from the customer care of the Ops 1 &2 states that they could not reconsider the issue. Even the approach to National Consumer Help Line Centre could not resolve the issue satisfactorily. As a result, the National Consumer Helpline Centre advised the Complainants to approach the District Forum. Under the circumstances, it is stated that the above complaint is filed with a prayer to grant reliefs, as stated supra.
3. The Opposite Parties 1 &2 filed Written version denying the allegations made in the complaint and praying the Forum to dismiss the complaint with heavy costs. They have also stated that the complaint is filed with false and baseless allegations.
No defence has been taken in their W/V for non-settlement of complainants’ claim. It is well settled that mere pleadings without any documentary evidence are of no value. As a result of which, the evidence adduced by the complainants remain unrebutted.
The OP.3 remained absent throughout the proceedings right from the beginning. No single document has been filed by both the Ops 1 & 2. The Ops 1 & 2 filed written arguments stating that the delay in scheduled flight from Hyderabad to Delhi is attributed to the operational reasons/technical snag. Inconvenience caused and loss incurred on account of the delay in schedule flight to the complainant, is admitted.
4. During the course of enquiry the complainants have got filed their affidavit of evidence reiterating the marital facts of the case supported by Ex.A1 to ExA11. The opposite party No.3 despite served with notice neither appeared/ nor appointed any representative nor has filed any documents on its behalf. Ops.1&2 remained absent.
5. Heard learned counsel for the complainants as well as for opposite parties No.1 and 2 and perused the material on record. The following issues are required to be determined for arrival of just and proper conclusion
5.1 Whether the complainants could prove any deficiency in service and Unfair
Trade Practice on the part of the OPs ?
5.2. Whether the complainants are entitled to any reliefs as prayed for ?,
5.3 To what extent ?
Answers to the above points:
5.1 Admitted facts are delay in scheduled flight from Hyderabad to Delhi. The complainants proved cancellation of booked tickets, as per the advice of the Ops 1 & 2., Rebooking of other tickets,, vide Ex.A.2. Causing delay in flight scheduled from Hyderabad to Delhi without proving, forcing to rebook at higher price for the trip thereby inflicting harassment and agony to the complainant as well as other passengers amounts to unfair trade practice adopted by the Ops 1&2, Even cancellation of booked tickets from Delhi to Srinagar and rebooking the same again due to deliberate and conscious actions of the Opposite parties 1&2 for the complainants amounts to deficiency in service too. Mere pleading of delay, which is due to operational reasons/technical snag but failed to prove the same and by filing no documents to substantiate their pleadings has no value in the eye of law. The differential/additional amount of Rs.29,975/- incurred by the complainants is proved,Ex.A.9. on account of deficiency of service on the part of the Ops 1 & 2. Cancellation of hotel arrangements made subsequent to the booking of tickets has also been proved by the complainants.
All the above actions of the Ops 1 &2 are conscious wrong doings amounting to unfair trade practice causing loss and inconvenience to the complainants as such there is a possibility of causing harassment and loss to many other such passengers who rebooked and cancelled the booked tickets for which OPs1 & 2 are liable.
In so far award of Punitive Damages, is concerned, considering the facts of the case and relying on the decision of Apex Court in the case of General Motors (I) Pvt.Ltd, vs. Ashok Ramniklal Tolat & Anr, decided on 9.10.2014, which is reiterated, considering the fact situation, in the latest judgment by the Supreme Court (D.B), on 18.02.2021 in the case of TATA MOTORS LTD, V/s Antonio Paulo Vaz & Anr., we hold that the Ops 1 & 2 are liable for Punitive damages as has been claimed by the complainants, apart from compensation and costs.
Opposite party No.3 is only the travelling agent, who booked tickets according to the availability of the same and it has no role in delay caused in the scheduled flight resulting in causing inconvenience and losses incurred and experienced, respectively, by the complainants in connection with the above travelling by the complainants. As such, OP.3 it is not liable for anything.
The complainants specifically pleaded in the complaint for grant of Punitive Damages apart from compensation and refunding of the differential/additional costs incurred in rebooking the tickets ie. Rs. 29,975/-for the journey undertaken by them on the above dates to the above places.
In view of our above discussion and findings, we allow the complaint partly holding the O.Ps 1 &2, jointly and severally liable, who are hereby directed to do, as mentioned below, under 5.3. and OP.3 is exonerated from any liability, under the circumstances.
5.2 The complainant is entitled to the reliefs as mentioned infra.
- In the result,
A. the complaint against the Ops. 1& 2 is allowed in part and the Opposite party No. 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable :
- To pay to the complainants, Rs 29,975/- spent by the complainants towards differential/additional cost incurred for rebooking the tickets along with interest @ 9 % p.a. from the date of payment till its realization.
- Rs.20,000/- compensation for mental agony and harassment.
- Rs.2.0 lakhs towards Punitive damages for adoption of unfair Trade Practice by the Ops1 and 2 out of which Rs.1.0 lakh be paid to the complainants and remaining Rs.1.0 be deposited with the State Consumer Welfare Fund. TS.
- Rs.5,000/- towards costs of the litigation.
B. Complaint against the opposite party No.3 is dismissed without costs.
Time for compliance : 45 days from the date of receipt of this order in default the above granted amounts, except costs, shall carry interest @ 12% p.a.
Dictated to steno, transcribed and typed by him, pronounced by us on this the 26th day of July, 2021.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESS EXAMINED
NIL
Exhibits filed on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A1 – Copy of Airline Tickets dt. 31.10.2018.
Ex.A2 – Copy of New Airline Tickets dt. 23.12.2018.
Ex.A3 – Copy of Mail dt. 24.12.2018
Ex.A4 – Copy of reply mail dt. 25.12.2018.
Ex.A5 – Copy of mail dt. 04.01.2019.
Ex.A6 – Copy of mail dt.05.01.2019.
Ex.A7 – Copy of mail dt. 06.01.2019.
Ex.A8 – Copy of mail dt. 08.01.2019.
Ex.A9 – Copy of mail dt. 18.01.2019.
Ex.A10 – Copy of mail dt. 18.01.2019.
Ex.A11 – Copy of mail dt. 04.02.2019.
Exhibits filed on behalf of the Opposite party :
Nil
MEMBER PRESIDENT
