DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE
PRESENT: Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB: PRESIDENT
Smt. PRIYA.S, BAL, LLB, MBA (HRM): MEMBER
Tuesday the 31st day of May 2022
C.C.354/2016
Complainant
Janish
S/o. Jagannivasan
Thekkuveetil House
P.O. Cheekkilode
Kozhikode – 673 315
(By Adv. Smt. Sajna. P)
Opposite Party
ATT Holidays
Ground Floor, NT Building
Chinthavalappu Junction
MM Ali Road
Kozhikode – 673 002
(By Adv. Sri. T.P. Arshad)
-
By Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN – PRESIDENT
This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
- The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:
The complainant got employment visa as a cook to the UAE, spending Rs.80,000/-. He approached the opposite party for arranging flight ticket. He entrusted his passport and ticket fare of Rs.10,070/- to the opposite party. The opposite party informed him that the flight ticket is ready for travel on 28/05/2016 and informed him to reach Karippur Airport before 8.AM with visa, passport and flight ticket. But he was sent back from the airport since there was no emigration clearance. Then only the complainant realised that emigration clearance was not done. When he contacted the opposite party, he admitted that it was a mistake on the part of the staff. The complainant lost the job abroad due to the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. He had to sustain huge monetary loss and mental agony. The complainant is entitled to get Rs.80,000/- spent for the visa Rs.10,070/- spent for the flight ticket and Rs.3,00,000/-, as compensation from the opposite party. Hence the complaint.
- The opposite party filed written version denying and disputing the averments and the claims in the complaint. It is true that the complainant had approached the opposite party for issuing a flight ticket to Al Ain in the UAE. The opposite party has nothing to do with the visa and other procedures like emigration clearance. The flight ticket was issued to the complainant on 25/05/2016. The allegation that the opposite party had promised to arrange all the things for the travel abroad is false and hence denied. The passport was never handed over to the opposite party. The complainant was issued the ticket of Air India Expresss Flight No. IX-335/336 from Calicut to Al Ain for the day 28 May, 2016 for a total amount of Rs.9,970/- including the service charge of Rs.50.26/-. The flight ticket charges to be paid to the Air India Express was Rs.9,919.74/-. Though the service charge allowable to the opposite party was Rs.150/-, the complainant was given a discount of Rs.100/- by the opposite party. The opposite party has not stated anything except issuing the flight ticket and it was not in the purview of the opposite party to arrange job abroad. The allegation that the opposite party has told that it was a mistake of the staff is false and hence denied. The visa stamping on the passport of the complainant was done by some other travel agency and it was the obligation of the complainant to get the emigration clearance stamped on his passport from the passport office. The opposite party is not at all liable for the irresponsible act of the complainant. Since the complainant could not travel on the flight ticket issued by the opposite party, his ticket was cancelled and he was refunded the balance amount. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. There is no cause of action for the complainant. With the above contentions, the opposite party prays for dismissal of the complaint.
4. The points that arise for determination in this case are:
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
- Reliefs and costs.
- Evidence consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Exts A1 to A3 on the side of the complainant. The opposite party filed proof affidavit. Exts B1 and B2 were marked.
- The opposite party filed brief argument note.
- Point No.1 – The complainant has approached this Commission with a prayer to direct the opposite party to pay him Rs.80,000/- spent for the visa, Rs.10,070/- spent for the flight ticket and Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation on account of the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The case of the complainant is that he got employment visa to the UAE and he took air ticket from the opposite party, but he was sent back from the airport for want of emigration clearance prior to his leaving for UAE, for which, the opposite party was responsible. In order to substantiate his case, the complainant got himself examined as PW1. PW1 has filed proof affidavit and deposed in terms of the averments in the complaint. Ext. A1 is the confirmation of air ticket of Air India Express, Ext. A2 is the copy of the entry permit and Ext. A3 is the copy of the passport of the complainant.
8. The case advanced by the opposite party is that the complainant had approached them only for the flight ticket to Al Ain in UAE and they have issued the flight ticket and it was not their responsibility to get emigration clearance. It is also their case that they have given refund to the complainant as allowed by the carrier Air India Express. According to the opposite party, there was no negligence or deficiency in service on their part. Ext B1 is the copy of the invoice and Ext. B2 is the copy of the refund note.
9. Admittedly, the complainant approached the opposite party on 25/05/2016 for flight ticket to Al Ain which was issued by the opposite party on the same day. There is absolutely nothing in evidence to show that the complainant has ever asked the opposite party for any service in connection with emigration clearance. In the cross examination, PW 1 has admitted that he did not hand over the passport to the opposite party and he was not aware of the fact that emigration clearance was necessary for his journey abroad. This itself indicates that the complainant never asked the service of the opposite party for emigration clearance. PW 1 has also admitted that apart from the ticket fare, he has not paid any amount to the opposite party for any other service. It is clearly admitted by PW 1 that the visa was arranged by his friend and not by the opposite party. From the admission of PW1 it is crystal clear that it was not the responsibility of the opposite party to get emigration clearance for the complainant.
10. Going by the averments in the complaint it can be seen that the complainant has no specific case that he had entrusted the work of getting emigration clearance for him to the complainant and had paid for any such service. The pleadings in paragraph 3 of the complaint is to effect that he approached the opposite party for arranging the flight ticket. The evidence in hand indicates that the responsibility of the opposite party was limited to the issuance of flight ticket and he was paid only for that service. This itself shows that the complainant has not asked for any other service from the opposite party. That being the position, the opposite party cannot be found fault with for sending the complainant back from the airport by the authorities concerned for want of emigration clearance. No negligence or deficiency in service is proved against the opposite party. The opposite party cannot be saddled with any liability in connection with the amount paid by the complainant for obtaining visa or for loss of his job. It is not proved that any loss or injury has been caused or occasioned to the complainant due to any act or omission on the part of the opposite party. Consequently, it follows that the complainant is not entitled to get any of the reliefs prayed for.
11. Point No.2: In view of the finding on the above point, the complainant is not eligible to claim and get any of the reliefs and the complaint is only to be dismissed.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed. However, no order as to costs.
Pronounced in open Commission on this the 31st day of May 2022.
Date of Filing: 12/08/2016
Sd/-
MEMBER
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant :
Ext. A1 – Confirmation of air ticket of Air India Express
Ext. A2 – Copy of the entry permit
Ext. A3 – Copy of the passport of the complainant
Exhibits for the Opposite Party
Ext. B1 – Copy of the invoice
Ext. B2 – Copy of the refund note
Witnesses for the Complainant
PW 1 – Janish - (Complainant)
Witnesses for the opposite parties
Nil
Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER
Forwarded/By Order
Assistant Registrar
