IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated, the 28th day of November, 2023
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 37/2023 (Filed on 09/02/2023)
Petitioner : Krishnakumar P.N.
S/o. Narayanan Nair,
Krishnakripa,
Kudamaloor P.O.
Kottayam – 686017
(Adv. N. Gopalakrishnan)
Vs.
Opposite party : Air India Limited,
Having its registered office at 309
NH 48, Block A, Sector 30,
Gurugram, Haryana 122001.
O R D E R
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
The complaint is filed under section 35 of the consumer protection Act 2019
The brief of the complainant’s case is as follows.
The complainant is a retired army officer and the opposite party is an airline company owned and run by TALACE Private Limited, a special purpose vehicle of TATA sons. On 10/2/21 the complainant tried to book the ticket from Kochi to New Delhi flight chartered by the opposite party. The complainant made the payment through internet banking but however, initially tickets for the complainant
and his wife were not generated even after the amount of Rs.6,693/– being debited
from the complainant’s account. Thereafter on that day itself the complainant had booked economy flight tickets for the route Kochi to New Delhi and also the return
tickets from opposite parity’s website on 10/2/ 21, 11/02/21 and 12/02/2021.The proposed date of journey was on 7/05/21 and the return ticket was booked for the date 12/5/21. The payments were done through internet banking. Though the payment made on 10/2/21 was debited, no ticket was generated and so the complainant again transferred Rs.6,693/- on 11/02/21. This payment also was credited to the opposite party’s account as informed from the bank. But they did not care to refund the money. Thereafter though the complainant contacted the opposite party over phone and through email, they did not respond. On 12/02/21 the complainant again booked 10 tickets from Cochin to Delhi in the opposite party, Airways. The payment for the same Rs.20,029/- and Rs.13,680/- for the return ticket was made through internet banking. Thereafter on 19-3-21 the Air India AI466and AI 465 flights were canceled from the end of the airlines due to operational reasons and the same was informed to the complainant by the opposite party wide its email address itinerary receipt@airindia.in.The passenger was given an option to reschedule the journey if the passenger is convenient with the revised time and if not then the entire amount paid for the ticket shall be refunded since the cancelation happened from the end of the airline. Being not convenient with the revised timing the complainant informed the customer care executive of the opposite party that he wished to cancel the tickets and also asked him to initiate the steps for the refund of the entire amount paid at the earliest. The complainant was asked to write an email stating this and was assured that the refund would be done at the earliest. Believing this the complainant wrote an email to the customer care email address ecommerce@airIndia.in asking for the refund of the entire ticket value. But the opposite party has not made even a reply. Thereafter the complainant sent enquiries and follow up letters to the opposite party on several dates but for no use. The act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the complaint is filed for obtaining a direction to the opposite party to refund the entire amount of Rs.40,402/-with an interest of 12% per annum from the date of payment till the date of realization along with Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.10,000/- as cost of litigation.
Though notice was sent to the opposite party as per the postal records on 13/04/2023 the same was delivered to the opposite party but they refused to accept the notice and the same was returned as refused. So as per the settled position a notice refused to accept can be considered as deemed service. A refusal means the opposite party had got knowledge of the case filed before this Commission but they had willfully evaded from the appearance. Hence the opposite party was set ex parte. At any stage of proceedings the opposite party did not care to appear before this commission or contest their case.
The complainant filed a proof affidavit and documents which were marked as exhibits A1 to A5.
On the perusal of the pleadings and evidence on record we consider the following points for evaluation:
- Whether the complainant has established a clear case of deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?
- If so what are the reliefs to be granted to the complainant?
Point no 1 and 2
The case of the complainant is that the complainant tried to book 4 tickets from Cochin to Delhi in the Airways run by the opposite party two times on 10/02/21 and 11/02/21 out of which two were failed. Thus the complainant tried to book tickets from Kochi to Delhi and return tickets for four times on 10/02/2021 and on 12/02/21 the tickets were issued by the opposite parties. On the other occasions on 11/02/2021 the money was transferred to the opposite parties account but ticket was not generated. Even after his repeated demands the opposite parties did not pay the amounts. Thereafter both the flights with number AI466 from Kochi to Delhi And AI465 from Delhi to Kochi which were supposed to travel on 7-5-21 and 12-05-21 respectively where canceled by the opposite party and they intimated the complainant that if he opted to travel on another date he can choose the other date that they would refund the whole amount. But despite the repeated demands through email and legal notice the opposite parties did not respond or refund the money to the complainant. Hence the complaint is filed for the refund of money and for compensation along with litigation cost.
Exhibit A3 series are the E-ticket itineraries issued by the opposite party for the payment made on the said dates by which tickets are generated on 10/02/21 and 11/2/21 and 12/2/21. The Exhibit A3 is in the name of one Manu Nair Gopalakrishnan, Meera Nair Gopalakrishnan, Sindhu Gopalakrishnan, Gopalakrishnan Neelakantapillai for Rs.13,336/- to the flight no AI 466 with traveling date on 7/05/21 from Cochi to Delhi. Vide A3(a) ticket issued is to Radhika Krishnakumar and Krishnakumar P.N. for the journey on 07/05/2021 from Kochi to Delhi for Rs.6,668/- in flight No.AI 466. Vide A3(b) ticket issued in the name of the 4 passengers also in A3 from Delhi to Cochi in the flight no AI 465 on 12/05/21 for Rs. 13,680/-. Though the complainant alleges that these A3 series tickets were cancelled by the opposite parties, no refund has been made, but the complainant has not produced any evidence to prove that all the tickets were booked by him by paying the whole amount from his account. No evidence whether the said flights were canceled or not. Though the complainant alleges that the opposite parties intimated the cancellation of the flights on AI 465 and AI 466 through email itineraryreceipt@airindia.in, no such mail is produced before us. But the complainant has produced A2 series and A4 series which are the email communications he has done with the opposite party demanding the refund of the ticket amount of the canceled flights.
Exhibit A1 is the bank statement produced by the complainant from which it is clear that Rs.13,361/- ,Rs.6,693/-,Rs.10,909/-, are transferred to Air India payment on 10.02.21 and Rs.6,693/- and Rs.5,467/- on 11/02/21.
We observe that the opposite party has received all the payments from the complainant and it is inferred that the opposite party has arbitrarily canceled the flights causing difficulties to the passengers. The complainant/ consumer is not supposed to travel in the opposite party’s flight on the date and time prescribed by the opposite party but he has got a right to travel on the date and time fixed by him and for which he had paid the amount. The opposite party being a service provider is bound to protect the rights and privileges of its consumers and to value their convenience. Here the complainant has proved that there is deficiency on the part of the opposite party in
canceling the flights without providing alternate facility for the journey of the complainant and not refunding the money. The opposite party did not appear before the court by wilfully refusing to accept the notice sent by this Commission nor have filed any contrary evidence before us. Hence all the issues are answered in favor of the complainant and we allow the complaint.
Order
(1) The opposite party is directed to refund Rs.40,402/- (Rupees Forty thousand four hundred and two only) paid by the complainant and unlawfully retained by them with an interest @9% per annum from 09/02/2023 ie. the date of filing of the complaint till realisation.
(2) The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards litigation cost to the complainant
Order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of copy of receipt of this Order, if not complied as directed, the compensation amount will carry 9% interest from the date of Order till realisation.
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 28th day of November, 2023
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 –Copy of account statement for the period 10-02-2021 to 11-02-2021
A2 – Copy of e-mail communication
A3 series- Copy of e-ticket itinerary / Receipt (3 nos.)
A4 – Copy of e-mail communication to opposite party
A5 series- Copy of e-mail communication (9 Nos.)
By Order
Assistant Registrar
