By  Sri.P.K.Sasi, President

        The case of the complainant is that he has booked a flight ticket by online to travel from Kuwait to Cochin on 09/05/12. Due to some unexpected event the complainant happened to cancel the ticket on 24/04/12. As per the cancellation the opposite parties are liable to refund Rs.7,123.98 to the complainant. But no refund was made by the opposite parties. Similarly the complainant booked another ticket on 10/05/2012. Unfortunately due to the strike called by the pilots the complainant compelled to cancel that ticket also. Accordingly the opposite parties are liable to refund Rs.10,974.78. to the complainant. That also not refunded by the opposite parties.  Even after several requests made by the complainant the opposite parties did not take any necessary arrangements to refund the money. The act of the opposite parties denying the refund of ticket charges to the complainant amounts to deficiency in service on their part. Hence a lawyer notice was issued on 16/05/2013 for which the 1^st opposite party has sent a reply admitting the claim raised by the complainant but justifying their inaction to refund the amount. The reasons stated by the 1^st opposite party was that the credit card of the complainant through which he has booked the tickets was expired. According to the complainant his credit card was not expired it was valid. Then 2^nd notice was issued by the complainant to the same address of the opposite parties.  Whereas it was returned stating no such designation as  General Manager, Air India Express. Subsequently the complainant issued another notice to the opposite parties in the address given in the reply to the first notice. Whereas the 3^rd notice was returned since it was refused to accept by the opposite parties. Hence this complaint is filed for getting relief.

        2) Being notice on the complaint the 1^st opposite party entered appearance through their authorized persons and filed 2 versions. The 1^st version dtd. 18/11/2014 and the 2^nd version dtd. 05/03/2015. The contentions raised in both version are similar. According to the opposite parties they admitted the two tickets booked by the complainant and that was cancelled as stated in the complaint the refund amount is also admitted. The only reason stated for belated refund is that with introduction of new reservation system ‘Radixx’ developed by a company based in Canada, some issues relating to system had been recognized with its operation in the first few months, the system automated refund being one of them. Necessary steps for rectification were being taken. Some cancellations done meanwhile were not automatically processed to respective credit card accounts due to system error and issues at the payment gateway.

        3) Manual refund had to be processed by the accounts department for those bookings which were not system refunded and as there were quite a few cases it was taking time for the refund to be processed manually. They further stated that the refund can be done only to the same credit card account used to make the payment, and not to any other account due to security reasons and avoidance of fraudulent activities. As per their record refund as entitled by the passenger, has been processed to his credit card account, to which he is not confirmed so far. When the refund to the complainant could not be processed properly their officers tried to contact the complainant through the ID provided at the time of booking of the ticket. But there was no response from the side of complainant. It was intimated to the complainant regarding the expiry of credit card by the staff of the opposite party when it was found out by them. The opposite parties submitted that they have not committed any sort of deficiency in service towards the complainant.

        4) Then the case was posted for evidence and the points for consideration was that

                1) whether there was any willful delay happened on the

                    part of opposite parties to refund the ticket charge ?

                2) whether any deficiency in service happened on the

                    part of the opposite parties ?

                3) If so, what cost and relief ?

        5) From the side of complainant his wife who is the POA holder appeared before the Forum and filed proof affidavit, in which she has affirmed and explained all the averments stated in the complaint in detail. It is stated in the proof affidavit that the opposite parties had refunded Rs.18,098/- after filing this complaint.  She also produced 10 documents which are marked as Ext. P1 to P10. Ext. P1 copy of lawyer notice dtd. 16/05/13; Ext. P2 is the postal receipts; Ext. P3 series (2 Nos) A/D cards; Ext. P4 reply received from opposite parties; Ext. P5 postal cover; Ext. P6 copy of lawyer notice dtd.22/07/13; Ext. P7 postal receipts; Ext. P8 A/D card; Ext. P9 the letter returned unreceived and Ext. P10 Power of Attorney. From the side of opposite parties the Deputy Chief of Commercial one Mr. Aby George appeared before the Forum and submitted counter proof affidavit in which he has affirmed and described all the contentions raised in their version in detail. He also produced four documents which are marked as Ext. R1 to R4. Ext. R1 is the print out of Email with attachment dtd. 28/09/2015; Ext. R2 is the print out of Email along with attachments dtd.02/12/2014; Ext. R3 is the print out of Email dtd. 02/07/14 and Ext. R4 is the print  out of screen shot of the reservation details.  Both sides filed detailed argument notes and we heard in detail also. We have gone through the contents of the affidavits and perused the documents produced from  both sides.

        6) It is argued by the learned counsel for the complainant that the ticket charge was refunded by the opposite parties after filing this complaint. He strongly argued based on the lawyer notice refused by the opposite parties. According to the complainant the opposite parties could have refund the amount much earlier before dragging the complainant to file this complaint. The credit card was always live and it was never expired. The learned counsel stressed on the point that opposite parties have not produced any piece of evidence to show that the credit card of the complainant was expired. The learned counsel for the opposite parties submitted that they have not committed any sort of deficiency in service towards the complainant the delay caused to make the refund was only due to error of the system newly installed and due to the expiry of the credit card of the complainant. As per the records available before us the opposite parties had refunded the amount only on 20/06/13 and 25/06/13 respectively that too after one year from the cancellation of the ticket the complaint is filed on 17/01/14. However, it is admitted by the complainant that the opposite parties refunded the amount on the date on which the refund transferred is affected is not mentioned either in the complaint or in the proof affidavit. If the dates of refund submitted by the opposite parties are taken into consideration it is much  prior to the filing of the complaint but after the issuance of notices. Considering the points discussed hereinabove we don’t have any convincing reasons for the delay happened on the part of opposite parties to refund the ticket charges. Therefore we are of the opinion that the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service towards the complainant.

        In the result, we allow this complaint in part and the opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation and cost to the complainant within one month from receiving copy of this order. Failing which, the complainant is entitled to get 12% interest till realization.

        Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the     15^th day of July 2017.