Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/221/2023

AAINA NISCHAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

AIR MAURITIUS - Opp.Party(s)

SHUBHAM MEHTA

03 Sep 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/221/2023
Date of Institution	:	28/04/2023
Date of Decision	:	03/09/2024

 

1. Aaina Nischal d/o Mukesh Nischal w/o Aditya Guleria, r/o House No.167, Sector 20A, Chandigarh.
2. Aditya Guleria s/o K.S. Guleria r/o 454, Harmilap Nagar, SAS Nagar, Mohali (Presently residing at House No.167, Sector 20A, Chandigarh).

… Complainants

V E R S U S

Air Mauritius having its registered Indian Head office at 4^th Floor, R Kedia Building, Room No.403 & 408, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India through its Manager/Authorised representative.

… Opposite Party

 

CORAM :	SHRI PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	MRS. SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SHRI SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Shubham Mehta, Advocate for complainant
	:	Sh. Ajay Singh Parmar, Advocate for OP

 

Per Pawanjit Singh, President

1. The present consumer complaint has been filed by Aaina Nischal & Aditya Guleria, complainants against the aforesaid opposite party (hereinafter referred to as the OP).  The brief facts of the case are as under :-

1. It transpires from the allegations, as projected in the consumer complaint, that on 8.7.2022, complainant No.1 had booked two international flight tickets, to and fro, for herself and her husband (complainant No.2) from the OP for their trip to Mauritius and the return flight No.MK 748 (hereinafter referred to as “subject flight”) was to depart from Mauritius on 21.12.2022 at 6:45 PM and arrive at Mumbai on 22.12.2022 at 2.25 a.m. Copies of e-ticket and boardng pass of the complainants are Ex.C-1 (Colly.). Since the complainants are residents of Chandigarh, complainant No.2 had booked two Vistara Airline e-tickets for himself and his wife (complainant No.1) for total sum of ₹14,960/- and the said flight (No.UK 653) was to depart from Mumbai on 22.12.2022 at 06.05 a.m. (i.e. much after arrival of the Air Mauritius flight at Mumbai) and arrive at Chandigarh on the same day at 08.20 a.m. Copies of tax invoice alongwith boarding pass of the complainants are Ex.C-2 (Colly.).  Surprisingly, without assigning any reason whatsoever, complainant had received an email dated 20.12.2022 at 9.59 p.m. i.e. just within a time span of 24 hours before their subject return flight from Mauritius to Mumbai intimating that the subject flight had been delayed from 6.45 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. thereby delaying the same by an hour and 45 minutes. Not only this, complainants received another email dated 21.12.2022 at 12.21 a.m. from the OP informing that the subject flight had again been delayed from 8.30 p.m. to 10.30 p.m. on the same day and in this manner got delayed by three hours and 45 minutes. Due to the aforesaid unexpected and inordinate delay in the subject flight timing, complainants reached Mumbai at around 6.10 a.m. on 22.12.2022 instead of the scheduled time of 2.25 a.m. and they were unable to board their next Vistara Airline flight as passengers were supposed to be boarded at 5.05 am.  The complainants were further compelled to cancel their tickets which they had purchased for ₹14,960/- for their journey from Mumbai to Chandigarh as a result of which they incurred loss of ₹8,044/- as only ₹6,916/- (14960 – 8044) was refunded to them.  Copies of emails are Ex.C-3 & C-4.  Not only this, complainants were further compelled to book a new flight immediately on 22.12.2022 for their travel from Mumbai to Chandigarh by paying a sum of ₹43,494/-.  In this manner, the complainants had suffered additional loss of ₹51,538/- (43,494 + 8044).  Copies of cancellation invoice and new e-tickets are Ex.C-5 and Ex.C-6.  Complainants raised issue with the OP by sending number of emails (Ex.C-7 Colly.), but, nothing has been done. Thereafter the complainant also sent a legal notice (Ex.C-8) to the OP which was replied by it vide reply dated 7.2.2023 (Ex.C-9). In this manner, the aforesaid act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. OP was requested several times to admit the claim, but, with no result.  Hence, the present consumer complaint.
2. OP resisted the consumer complaint, filed its written version and admitted that the complainants had purchased the to and fro air tickets from portal of the answering OP for their trip from Mumbai to Mauritius. However, it is alleged that complainants had not booked the tickets from Mumbai to Chandigarh through the portal of answering OP nor it had any information about their return plan and there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part as claimed by the complainants. On merits it is alleged that the answering OP always follow the rules and guidelines laid by the Govt. from time to time and the airline staff pass over information available to every passenger.  It is further admitted that complainants had booked two return air tickets on 8.9.2022 from the portal of the answering OP.  Cause of action set up by the complainants is denied. The consumer complaint is sought to be contested.
3. The complainants chose not to file the rejoinder.

2. In order to prove their case, parties have tendered/proved their evidence by way of respective affidavits and supporting documents.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the file carefully, including written arguments.
   1. At the very outset, it may be observed that when it is an admitted case of the parties that the complainants had purchased return air tickets of the OP airline for their journey from Mumbai-Mauritius-Mumbai sector and the grievance of the complainants is only with respect to their return journey from Mauritius to Mumbai as the subject flight was delayed by 3 hours 45 minutes, as a result of which complainants reached Mumbai airport at around 6.10 a.m on 22.12.2022 instead of scheduled arrival time of 02.25 a.m. on 22.12.2022 and could not board the flight from Mumbai to Chandigarh which was scheduled to depart at 6.05 a.m. and the complainants were compelled to purchase fresh air tickets for the said journey by spending an amount of ₹43,494/-, as is also evident from the Ex.C-6, after cancelling the earlier tickets, as is also evident from Ex.C-5 for which only an amount of ₹6,916/- was refunded, the case is reduced to a narrow compass as it is to be determined if the aforesaid acts amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP and the complainants are entitled to the reliefs prayed for in the consumer complaint, as is the case of the complainants or if the consumer complaint of the complainants being false and frivolous, is liable to dismissed, as is the defence of the OP.
   2. Perusal of Ex.C-1 clearly indicates that on 8.9.2022, complainants had booked the to and fro air tickets of OP airline for Mumbai-Mauritius-Mumbai sector and the departure time of the subject flight for return journey was 6.45 p.m. on 21.12.2022 with arrival time of 2.25 a.m. on 22.12.2022 at Mumbai airport. 
   3. Moreover, when it is not disputed by the OP that the subject flight was delayed by 3 hours 45 minutes and reached Mumbai airport at around 6.10 a.m. and no reason has been assigned by the OP on account of which the subject flight was delayed and further the OP could not explain if the flight was delayed due to some technical defect or security reason and due to the said delay in arrival of the subject flight at Mumbai airport, complainants could not board their next flight from Mumbai to Chandigarh, which had already left at 6.05 a.m. and the complainants were compelled to cancel the earlier tickets (Ex.C-5) and purchase new tickets (Ex.C-6) on the spot, it is safe to hold that there is clear deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
   4. In view of the aforesaid discussion, it is safe to hold that the complainants have successfully proved the cause of action set up in the consumer complaint and the present consumer complaint deserves to succeed and OPs are liable to refund the total amount of ₹51,538/- to the complainants i.e. ₹43,494/- (price of fresh tickets) + ₹8044/- (amount deducted on cancellation of earlier tickets), alongwith interest and compensation etc.
4. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds, the same is hereby partly allowed and OP is directed as under :-

1. to pay ₹51,538/- to the complainants alongwith interest @ 9% per annum (simple) w.e.f. 22.12.2022 onwards.
2. to pay ₹15,000/-, in lump sum, to the complainants as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment as well as litigation expenses.

5. This order be complied with by the OP within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy thereof, failing which the amounts mentioned above shall carry penal interest @ 12% per annum (simple) from the date of expiry of said period of 45 days, instead of 9% [mentioned at Sr.No.(i)], till realisation.
6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly.
7. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

03/09/2024	Sd/- [Pawanjit Singh] President
	Sd/-
	[Surjeet Kaur] Member
	Sd/-
	[Suresh Kumar Sardana] Member