DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  BARNALA, CAMP COURT AT AMRITSAR, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : RBT/CC/2018/409

Date of Institution : 04.06.2018/29.11.2021

Date of Decision : 02.08.2022

1. Mr. Harmeet Singh S/o Sh. Darbara Singh. 

2. Mrs. Baljit Kaur W/o Sh. Harmeet Singh. 

R/o L-1, Gurnam Nagar, Sultanwind Road, Amritsar.   

  …Complainants

Versus

1. Gauri Travels, Guru Bazaar, Amritsar through its Prop./Partner/ Principal Officer.

2. Malindo Airlines Having its office at Sri Guru Ram Dass Jee International Airport, Raja Sansi, Amritsar through its Chairman/ Managing Director/Principal Officer Service through its Officer Incharge.

…Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint U/S 12, 12 (1)(c) and 13 of The Consumer Protection Act 1986 as amended upto date

Present: Sh. Deepinder Singh Adv counsel for the complainant.

Opposite party No. 1 exparte.

Sh. Amit Monga Adv counsel for opposite party No. 2.

 

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover : President

2. Smt. Urmila Kumari : Member

(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER PRESIDENT):

    The present complaint has been received by transfer from District Consumer Commission, Amritsar in compliance of the order dated 26.11.2021 of the Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh. The complainant filed the present complaint under Section 12, 12 (1) (C) and 13 of the Consumer Protection Act against Gauri Travels, Amritsar and another. (in short the opposite parties). 

2. The facts leading to the present complaint as stated by the complainant are that the complainants availed the services of the opposite party No. 1 for vacation tour for travel to Malaysia-Phuket-Kairbi-Bangkok-Bali and back to Amritsar and got the Air Travel book through opposite party No. 2 by paying the required consideration and said tour commence on 28.5.2018. The complainants on reaching Kualalampur, Malaysia when boarded the connecting flight to Phuket on 28.5.2018 were allowed Boarding passed by opposite party No. 2 and when the complainants were boarded on the said flight to Phuket were after few minutes were offloaded and were not allowed to travel without assigning any valid reason. The complainants who were in foreign land and were not allowed to travel on their vacation destination and offloaded from the aircraft and were directed to leave the country immediately were in shell shocked situation. The complainants again got the Air Tickers booked for the return back to Amritsar by purchasing another set of tickets. The complainants were kept in custody by the immigration officials of the opposite party No. 2 at the Airport and and time and again threatened and they were sent back on 29.5.2018 to Amritsar. The complainants also suffered loss of more than three lakh of rupees including two lakh fifty thousand for tour and travel package paid to opposite party No. 1 as all hotel, sight seeing and tour bookings go wasted and no refund of any sort was made to the complainant rather they had to incur expenditure for the Air travel from Kualalampur to Amritsar and other expenses. The complainants even tried to contact the concerned person of opposite party No. 1 but they ignored the complainants. The act of the opposite parties amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.-

1) The opposite parties may be directed to refund the amount of Rs. 3 lacs alongwith interest at the rate of 12% from 28.5.2018 till realization. 

2) To pay Rs. 15,00,000/- to the complainant on account of compensation.

3) To pay cost of legal expenses.

4) Any other relief to which the complainant is found entitled. 

3. The opposite party No. 1 preferred to remain exparte.

4. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite party No. 2 filed written version taking preliminary objections on the grounds that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint against the answering opposite party as there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering opposite party. The complainant purchased the tickets from opposite party No. 1. The complainant has not come to this Commission with clean hands. They further submitted that the complainants as well Baljit Kaur and Gurdeep Singh children of complainants booked their air tickets from opposite party No. 1 for travel to Malaysia-Phuket-Kairabhi-Bangkok-Bali and back to Amritsar. The entire routing for the trip was not on Malindo Airways as the complainants purchased tickets of other airlines i.e. Air Asia also. The complainant Harmeet Singh was not allowed to travel further as he was not having valid passport for further travel. The validity of his passport was less than 6 months. Baljit Kaur was allowed by the immigration authorities to travel as she was having valid passport but she do not want to continue the journey at her own will. Their children were having valid passport and they took the flight for further journey and they were permitted to travel by the immigration officers. As such the immigration officer has no other option and this action was based on the visa rules and regulations of country. The passport validity and visa requirements are available on the public domain and official website of country. All the information regarding the requirements/rules and regulations of visa is also displayed in the Malindo Airways Website. The complainants Harmeet Singh and Baljit Kaur was having the return ticket of flight on 9.6.2018 and in view of the situation arises the answering opposite party allowed the complainants to re-schedule their return flights and the complainants then allowed to book their flight on 29.6.2018 with no extra cost from Kuala Lumpur to Amritsar. The immigration department is Government Agency and immigration officers are not connected with the Malindo Airways as well other private airlines companies. They were deputing by the Government of country to ensure that no passenger will not break the law/rules and regulation of land/country.

5. On merits, it is submitted that the complainants booked their air tickets from opposite party No. 1. Rest of the submissions already submitted by the opposite party No. 2 in preliminary objections so there is no need to repeat the same. However, it is denied that the complainants were kept in custody by the immigration officials of opposite party No. 2. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the answering opposite party No. 2. Lastly the opposite party No. 2 prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint with costs. 

6. Both the parties filed their documents in support of their respective versions.  

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file carefully. Written arguments also filed by the opposite party No. 2. 

8. Learned counsel for the complainants argued that the complainants booked a for vacation tour for travel to Malaysia-Phuket-Kairbi-Bangkok-Bali through opposite party No. 1 and back to Amritsar and got the Air Travel book through opposite party No. 2 and said tour commence on 28.5.2018. He further argued that on reaching Kualalampur, Malaysia when the complainants were boarded on the said flight to Phuket they were offloaded and were not allowed to travel without assigning any reason. Learned counsel for the complainants further argued that complainants were directed to leave the country immediately and they again got the Air Tickers booked for the return back to Amritsar by purchasing another set of tickets. Learned counsel for the complainants argued that the complainants were kept in custody by the immigration officials of the opposite party No. 2 at the Airport and and they were sent back on 29.5.2018 to Amritsar and suffered loss of more than three lakh of rupees which amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. 

9. Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 argued that the complainant purchased the tickets from opposite party No. 1 for travel to Malaysia-Phuket-Kairabhi-Bangkok-Bali and back to Amritsar. The entire routing for the trip was not on Malindo Airways as the complainants purchased tickets of other airlines i.e. Air Asia also. He further argued that the complainant Harmeet Singh was not allowed to travel further as he was not having valid passport for further travel as  validity of his passport was less than 6 months. Baljit Kaur was allowed by the immigration authorities to travel as she was having valid passport but she do not want to continue the journey at her own will. Their children were having valid passport and they took the flight for further journey and they were permitted to travel by the immigration officers. He further argued that the passport validity and visa requirements are available on the public domain and official website of country. All the information regarding the requirements/rules and regulations of visa is also displayed in the Malindo Airways Website. The complainants Harmeet Singh and Baljit Kaur was having the return ticket of flight on 9.6.2018 and in view of the situation arises the answering opposite party allowed the complainants to re-schedule their return flights and the complainants then allowed to book their flight on 29.5.2018 with no extra cost from Kuala Lumpur to Amritsar. He further argued that the immigration department is Government Agency and immigration officers are not connected with the Malindo Airways as well other private airlines companies and they were deputing by the Government of country to ensure that passengers will not break the law/rules and regulation of land/country.

10. We have perused the record on the file. The opposite party No. 2 duly mentioned in their written version that Harmeet Singh complainant was not allowed to travel further as he was not having valid passport. The complainant has failed to rebut this main objection of the opposite party No. 2 by way of any evidence that the passport of complainant No. 1 is valid to travel further. We have perused the copy of passport of Harmeet Singh Ex.C-9 which is valid from 14.10.2008 to 13.10.2018 and he traveled from Kualalampur Malaysia to Phuket on 28.5.2018, so it is proved on the file that the validity of the passport of the complainant No. 1 is less than six months at the time of traveling on 28.5.2018 from Kualaampur, Malaysia to Phuket. Further, Baljit Kaur  complainant was allowed by the immigration authorities to travel as she was having valid passport but she do not want to continue the journey at her own will for which there is no fault of the opposite parties. It is mentioned in the written version that the children of the complainants  were having valid passport and they took the flight for further journey and they were permitted to travel by the immigration officers. The passport validity and visa requirements are available on the public domain and official website of country and all the information regarding the requirements/rules and regulations of visa is also displayed in the Malindo Airways Website opposite party No. 2 but complainants have not read the same before started their journey. Further, the immigration officers are not the employee of the opposite party No. 2 rather they are the Government officials who kept the complainants in custody for some hours for which also the opposite parties are not at fault. Even, the opposite party No. 2 rescheduled the tickets of the complainants on the same day from 9.6.2018 to 29.5.2018 for return back to Amritsar without any extra cost which fact also not denied by the complainant at any point of time. 

11. From the above discussion, this Commission has come to the conclusion that there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties rather the opposite party No. 2 provided best services to the complainants when they are in very bad situation at foreign land. Hence, there is no merit in the present complaint and same is accordingly dismissed. However, no order as to costs  or compensation. Copy of the order will be supplied to the parties by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar as per rules. File be sent back to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar. 

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

        2nd Day of August 2022

 

 

            (Ashish Kumar Grover)

            President

              

(Urmila Kumari)

Member