BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 213/2003 Filed on 28.05.2003

Dated : 30.06.2010

Complainant:

Stellus Netto Roy, Molly land, Puthenthoppu P.O, (via) St. Xavier's College, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. B. Vasudevan Nair)

Opposite party:

Akbar Travels of India Pvt. Ltd., Bency Tower, Vellayambalam, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. A. Abdul Kharim)

This O.P having been heard on 30.04.2010, the Forum on 30.06.2010 delivered the following :

ORDER

SMT. S.K. SREELA, MEMBER

The case of the complainant is as follows: The complainant had purchased an air ticket for his travel from Thiruvananthapuram to Singapore on 01.07.2002 and the complainant had obtained a flight coupon for the same on 13.06.2002 by paying an amount of Rs. 22,950/-. But due to some personal inconvenience the complainant postponed his journey and requested for refund of the ticket fare. But the same was not refunded stating one reason or the other. Further, the opposite party informed the complainant that the complainant had no direct dealings with the opposite party and it was through one Buna Vista Travels tickets were booked and that the said travels has not remitted the ticket amount to the opposite party and hence directed the complainant to approach Buna Vista Travels for refund. The complainant submits that he has no dealings with the said Buna Vista Travels and has filed this complaint for refund of the amount from the opposite party.

The opposite party has filed their version contending as follows: It is true that the complainant had purchased a ticket for his Singapore trip to fly on 1^st July 2002. The complainant purchased the said ticket through his travel agent M/s Buna Vista Travel for travel from Trivandrum-Singapore and return. In fact the complainant's travel agent purchased the said ticket on credit basis and so far not paid the cost of the ticket to this opposite party. This being the position, the opposite party is not in a position to reimburse the amount to the complainant for the unused ticket, but also to move for realization of the ticket cost. The complainant had to approach his travel agent for his ticket refund and not this opposite party, and after all this opposite party being an agent of the airline is not expected to make any refunds, as the costs of tickets were remitted to the accounts of the Airline. The complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. It is submitted that this opposite party had no knowledge about the postponement of the complainant's journey nor did he report the same on 20.07.2002 as alleged. It is further submitted that this opposite party had directed the complainant to approach his travel agent for the ticket reimbursement as they have not paid the cost of ticket till this moment. This opposite party had not stated any excuses to the complainant for the ticket refund as alleged. Since the ticket was purchased by the travel agent on the credit basis, it is the responsibility of the agent to refund the cost of unused ticket. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence prays for dismissal of the complaint.

PW1 has been examined on behalf of the complainant and marked Exts. P1 to P3. DW1 has been examined on behalf of opposite party and marked Ext. D1.

From the contentions raised following issues arise for consideration.

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any of the reliefs claimed?

Points (i) & (ii):- This is a case wherein the complainant has not been refunded the price of the unused ticket. The opposite party contended that as the tickets were purchased through another agent viz; “Buna Vista Travels”, the refund is to be claimed through them. But the complainant had argued that the said travel agent is not known to them and the complainant has only dealings with Akbar Travels.

We have gone through the records furnished by both parties. PW1 during cross has deposed that “ticket കൊടുക്കുന്പോള്‍ receipt കൂടെ കൊടുക്കാറുണ്ട് എന്ന് പറയുന്നു(Q) പൈസ കൊടുത്തു ടിക്കറ്റ് കിട്ടി എന്ന് എനിക്കറിയാം. Further more PW1 has deposed that original ticket എന്‍റെ കൈവശമായിരുന്നു. ഇപ്പോള്‍ ടിക്കറ്റ് എതിര്‍കക്ഷി refund-നായി വാങ്ങിയിട്ട് തിരിയെ തന്നില്ല”. As per Ext. P1, which is the photocopy of the ticket it has been mentioned as “Siti, Akbar Travels of In, Bency Tower”. So though the marking of Ext. P1 has been made subject to proof, the opposite party has admitted in Ext. P3 as follows: 'it is true that an airline ticket was issued in your name from my client's office for your travel on the sector Trivandrum-Colombo-Singapore and return on the Airlanka Airline. But it was purchased on credit by your travel agent M/s Buna Vista Travels, Trivandrum on assurance to pay its value'. Furthermore they have stated that 'you are requested to approach your travel agent with unused ticket for its ticket refund. Ticket refund is possible through your agent only'. DW1 has deposed that Buna Vista agency ഈ ticket-ന് പണം നല്‍കിയിട്ടുണ്ട്. ഈ affidavit file ചെയ്ത ശേഷമാണ് പണം നല്‍കിയത്. The learned counsel for the opposite party relied on the decision reported in I(2002)CPJ 430 wherein it has been held that the opposite party being an agent of the airline is not liable to make any refund, as the cost of the ticket were remitted to the account of the Airlines. Ext. D1 is the document produced by the opposite party to substantiate that the Buna Vista Tours had requested the opposite party for a ticket in the name of complainant. The complainant had objected the marking of Ext. D1. But as per Ext. P1 the name of Akbar Travels is mentioned. There is no mentioning of Buna Vista Travels in the same. Hence we find that the opposite party is liable to refund the amount of ticket to the complainant and the act of the opposite party in non-refunding the ticket price amounts to deficiency in service on their part.

On the basis of the above discussions and the documents, we hereby allow the complaint and the complainant is found entitled for refund of the cost of the ticket along with a compensation for deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

In the result, complaint is allowed. Opposite party shall refund the price of the ticket Rs. 22,950/- to the complainant along with a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and a cost of Rs. 2,500/- within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order failing which the entire amount shall carry interest @ 9% from the date of the order till realization.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of June 2010.

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

jb BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

O.P. No. 213/2003

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

PW1 - Stellus Netto Roy

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Photocopy of the ticket

P2 - Photocopy of letter dated 26.04.2003 to the opposite party.

P3 - Advocate notice dated 05.05.2003

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

DW1 - P.K. Lal

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

D1 - Copy of letter dated 10.06.2002

PRESIDENT

jb