Delhi

East Delhi

CC/289/2014

RAL KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

EASY TRIP - Opp.Party(s)

09 Apr 2014

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO. 289/14

 

 

Shri Raj Kumar

Prop. of Peer Travel Line

House NO. L-831/10

Sangam Vihar, New Delhi – 110 062                            ….Complainant

 

Vs.    

 

M/s. Easy Trip Planner Pvt. Ltd.

Plot No. 460

F.I.E. Patparganj Industrial Area

Anand Vihar, New Delhi – 110 092                                   …Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 21.03.2014

Judgement Reserved on: 26.04.2018

Judgement Passed on: 03.05.2018

 

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By: Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

 

 

JUDGEMENT

            This complaint has been filed by Shri Raj Kumar against M/s. Easy Trip Planner Pvt. Ltd. (OP) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with allegations of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. 

2.         The facts in brief are that complainant Raj Kumar, proprietor of Peer Travel Line booked four tickets for their guests/clients through Mr. Waseem, Ticketing Executive, International Division of the respondent on 12.12.2013 for the following passengers:

 

Name	Passport No.	Ticket No.
Mr. Peer Ghulam Hassan Sh ah	H9028279	0654325392136
Mrs. Masuda Hassan	H9028280	0654325392137 (cancelled)
Mr. Raffit Hasan	452332762	0654325392138
Mrs. Rubina Mattu	215503998	0654325392139

 

            Their travel date was 29.12.2013 from Delhi to Jeddah and complainant have got confirmed status of tickets for all guests/clients.  Their onward journey from Jeddah to Madina Sharif was on 30.12.2013 and Madina Sharif to Jeddah on 01.01.2014 then to USA was all reconfirmed alongwith hotel accommodation, transport and other arrangements. 

            Complainant deposited an amount of Rs. 75,000/- directly in the account of respondent vide account no. 16722320000026.  Complainant informed to the guests/clients for confirmation of their tickets.  However, the complainant received a call on 29.12.2013 that the airlines refused to give seat to one of their guest as her ticket was cancelled by airline with a prior intimation to respondent on 12.12.2013 itself.  The complainant was astonished to hear this. 

            It has further been stated that due to some system error Saudi Airlines cancelled the ticket of Mrs. Masuda Hassan (74 years) and were not willing to offer her seat after several efforts. 

            It has been stated that since their onward tickets, hotel and transport booking were already made, they got a ticket booked at the higher cost i.e. US$3067.20 as per details:

12/30/2013 – Departure    2 Stops                                               Total travel time : 10 h 25m

Delhi                                          Doha                                                                       4 h 20 m DEL 4.35 am                             DOH 6:25 am Qatar Airwars 563 Economy/Coach (Y)    Confirm seats with the airline*

Layover: 2 h 20 m

Doha                              Manama                                                                             0 h 45 m DOH 8:45am                  BAH 9:30am Gulf Air 523 Economy/Coach (Y)    Confirm seats with the airline*

Layover: 0 h 45 m

Manama                       Medine 2 h 15 m BAH 10:15am               MED 12:30pm Gulf Air 179 Economy/Coach (K)    Confirm seats with the airline*

 

            The complainant made a request for refund of the cancelled tickets.  Thus, it has been stated that there were deficiency on the part of respondent.  Hence, the complainant have prayed for refund of entire amount of Rs. 75,000/- with interest for the first time booked ticket and    Rs.1,95,000/- on account of emergency ticket booked from airport;          Rs. 2,00,000/- compensation on account of mental torture, pain and agony and Rs. 20,000/- towards litigation charges.    

3.         In the reply filed on behalf of Easy Trip Planner Pvt. Ltd. (OP), they have stated that complainant was habitual to hold tickets got booked by the respondent without the consent and permission of the respondent.  He was warned many a times.  They have denied that the airlines refused to give seat to one of their guest as her ticket was cancelled by the airline with a prior intimation to respondent on 12.12.2013.  He never received any information of cancellation of ticket of Mrs. Masuda Hassan from airlines.  No mail was ever received by them.  They have denied other facts also.

4.         Rejoinder to the WS of OP was filed by the complainant where the contents of the WS have been denied and has reaffirmed the averments of his complaint.

5.         The complainant has filed evidence by way of affidavit where he has examined himself.  He has narrated the facts which have been stated in the complaint.  He has got exhibited documents such as copy of certificate vide EMT code EMT001217687 and date of registration 26.04.2013 (Annex. 1), copy of 4 electronic ticket receipts (Annexure 2 to 5), copy of passports (Annexure 6 to 9), copies of bank deposit slip (Annexure 10), copy of account ledger (Annexure 11), copy of mail sent by the airlines to the respondent (Annexure 12 and 13) and copy of ticket booked at higher cost (Annexure 14). 

            In defence, OP have examined Shri Rahul Shrivastava, who have also deposed on affidavit.  He has narrated the facts which have been stated in the written statement.  He has also got exhibited copy of email dated 27.06.2014 as Ex. RW1/1.  

6.         We have perused the evidence and the documents placed on record as both the parties did not appear to argue.  Though, counsel for OP have not taken the plea as to whether the complainant was a consumer or not, but this has to be looked into as to whether complainant Raj Kumar, proprietor of Peer Travel Line falls under the definition of “consumer” or not. 

            If the complaint as such is perused, it is noticed that he has stated in his complaint that he booked 4 tickets for their guests/clients.  When he has booked the tickets for his clients, certainly, the transaction becomes a commercial transaction which is outside the purview of the definition of “consumer”.  This takes out the case of the complainant out of the Consumer Protection Act. 

            Even otherwise also, there is nothing on record to show that there was any deficiency on the part of OP. Hence, the complaint deserves its dismissal and the same is dismissed.  There is no order as to cost. 

            Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

       Member                                                                             Member    

 

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                   President