Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/40/2022

Samrat Bhardwaj - Complainant(s)

Versus

Go First, Go Airlines India Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Atul Goyal

05 Dec 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/40/2022
Date of Institution	:	4.1.2022
Date of Decision	:	5/12 /2023

 

Samrat Bhardwaj son of Sh. Subhash Kumar Bhardwaj resident of flat No.2264, Ground floor A, WHO flats, Sector 47-C, Chandigarh 160047.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

1. Go First Go Airlines (India) Limited 1^st floor, C-1, Wadia International Center Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400025(India).
2. Fly Yaatri, Search and fly private limited 8A, Rati Ram Park, Shivaji Marg, Najafgarh, New Delhi-110043(India).

Also at : plot No.6-A, D Block Extension Prem Nagar, Najafgarh Delhi (India)-110043.

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	SHRI PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	MRS. SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER

 

                                                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Atul Goyal, Advocate for complainant
	:	Ms. Niharika Goel, Advocate proxy for Sh. Paras Money Goyal, Advocate for OP No.1
	:	OP No.2 exparte.

 

Per Pawanjit Singh, President

1. The present consumer complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the opposite parties  (hereinafter referred to as the OPs).  The brief facts of the case are as under :-

1. It transpires from the averments as projected in the consumer complaint that on 23.8.2021 the complainant had purchased online air ticket for himself and his friend Yoginder Sharma as per the following schedule:-

Sr. No.	Name of passenger	Destination	Date of time of travel	Air Lines
1.	Samrat Bhardwaj Yoginder Sharma	Chandigarh to Mumbai	13.9.2021 07:15 (Departure 09:35 Arrival)	Indigo
2.	Samrat Bhardwaj Yoginder Sharma	Mumbai to Chandigarh	13.9.2021 17:10 (Departure 19:30 arrival)	Go first

 

The total amount charged  for the said ticket  was Rs.25,972/-  inclusive of all taxes and the copy of document containing booking detail is annexed as Annexure C-1.  Due to the change in the travel schedule the complainant re-booked the aforesaid  travel on 25.8.2021 as follow:-

Sr. No.	Name of passenger	Destination	Date of time of travel	Air Lines
1.	Samrat Bhardwaj Yoginder Sharma	Chandigarh to Mumbai	17.9.2021 07:15 (Departure 09:35 Arrival)	Indigo
2.	Samrat Bhardwaj Yoginder Sharma	Mumbai to Chandigarh	17.9.2021 17:10 (Departure 19:30 arrival)	Go first

  For the rebooking schedule, the complainant had to pay additional amount of Rs.11200/-  inclusive of all taxes  and in this manner the complainant paid a total amount of Rs.37,172/-  to the OPs. The copy of re-booking travel schedule is annexed as Annexure C-2. In this manner  one way journey ticket fair was charged by the OPs No.2 to the tune  of Rs.18586/-. On 17.10.2021  the complainant and his friend reached the Mumbai airport at evening time  for their journey from Mumbai to Chandigarh  but he was shocked to know that the schedule of the flight  operated by OP No.1 was changed and it has flown  back to Chandigarh earlier in the day. It is alleged that OPs have not intimated about the change of time through any message as a result of which the complainant and his friend could not reach Chandigarh from Mumbai to Chandigarh as per schedule.  Due to the aforesaid act of the OPs, the complainant was compelled to purchase other tickets for himself and his friend from Mumbai to Delhi from spice jet airlines by paying additional amount of Rs.8400/- from Delhi to Chandigarh they hired a taxi. The copy of travel details via spice jet is annexed as Annexure C-3.  In the meanwhile OP No.1 had processed the partial refund and had only credited an amount of Rs.7800/- into the account of the complainant and the copy of screen shot  of the email dated 20.9.2021 is Annexure C-4.  As the OPs rescheduled the flight time without intimating to the complainant and has only refunded partial amount to the complainant, the aforesaid act amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. OPs were requested several times to admit the claim, but, with no result.  Hence, the present consumer complaint.

2. OP No.1 resisted the consumer complaint and filed its written version, inter alia, taking preliminary objections of maintainability, concealment of facts, cause of action and admitted that the complainant has booked the subject ticket and also that the scheduled time of the flight was re-scheduled. However, it is alleged that the answering OP has already refunded Rs.7740/- to OP No.2 on 20.9.2021 vide receipt Annexure OP-3/1.  On merits, the facts as stated in the preliminary objections have been re-iterated. The cause of action set up by the complainant is denied.  The consumer complaint is sought to be contested.
3. However, the complaint against OP No.1 stands dismissed as withdrawn pursuance to  separate statement suffered by the counsel for the complainant on  28.11.2023 in view of order dated 10.5.2023  passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi.
4. OP No.2  was properly served and when OP No.2 did not turn up before this Commission, despite proper service, it was proceeded against ex-parte on 17.8.2022.
5. In rejoinder, complainant reiterated  the claim put forth in the consumer complaint and prayer has been made that the consumer complaint be allowed as prayed for.

2. In order to prove their case, contesting parties have tendered/proved their evidence by way of respective affidavits and supporting documents.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the file carefully, including the written arguments.
   1. At the very outset, it may be observed that when it has come on record that the complainant has not pressed the complaint against OP No.1 in view of order dated 10.5.2023 passed by the National Law Tribunal, New Delhi and also it is an admitted case of the complainant that  he had booked the air ticket from OP No.2 by paying an amount of Rs.25,972/- for the journey to be performed by the complainant and his friend from Chandigarh to Mumbai and return journey from Mumbai to Chandigarh  which was re-booked by them due to change in the schedule of the flight and the complainant had to pay additional amount of Rs.11200/-  to OP No.2 and also that the complainant and his friend had performed their journey from Chandigarh to Mumbai on 17.9.2021 but they could not perform return journey from Mumbai to Chandigarh on the  evening  of the same day due to change in the schedule of the subject flight without any prior intimation to the complainant and also that only partial amount of Rs.7800/- was refunded to the complainant and not the entire ticket amount of the return journey to the tune of Rs.18586/-  , the case is reduced to a narrow compass as it is to be determined if there is deficiency on the part of OP No.2 and the complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed for or the complaint is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.
   2. In the back drop of the foregoing admitted and disputed facts on record, it is clear that the entire case of the parties is revolving around the documentary evidence having been led by the  parties and  in order to determine the actual  controversy between the parties the same are required to be scanned carefully.
   3. Annexure C-1 is the copy of document containing travel details which clearly indicates that while booking the ticket from OP No.2, the complainant had paid an amount of Rs.25,972/-  for the journey to be performed on 13.9.2021 from Chandigarh to Mumbai through Indigo airlines whereas their return journey from Mumbai to Chandigarh through OP No.1 airlines was to be performed. Annexure C-2  is the rescheduled travel details of the complainant  which indicates that an additional amount of Rs.11200/-  was paid  to OP No.2  for the rebooking due to the change of schedule of travel. Annexure C-3 is copy of travel details of the complainant indicating that the complainant and his friend have purchased the ticket from Mumbai to Delhi  for 17.9.2021. Annexure OP3/1 is the refund details  which indicates that an amount of Rs.7580/-  was refunded to the complainant.
   4. Perusal of entire documentary evidence placed on record as discussed above, it is clear that the schedule of the subject flight was pre-poned on the relevant date and time without prior intimation to the complainant as a result of which the complainant and his friend could not perform their journey from Mumbai to Chandigarh and the aforesaid act of OPs amounts to deficiency in service. However, it has already come on record that the complainant in view of order dated 10.5.2023 passed by the National Law Tribunal, New Delhi did not press the complaint against the OP No.1, we are of the view that the OP No.2 is equally liable for the aforesaid deficient act  as the subject  booking of the subject tickets for the journey in question was booked by it on receiving entire ticket amount from complainant and it was also the bounden duty of the OP No.2 to intimate the complainant regarding the change in the flight schedule well in time.  Thus the OP No.2 being a legitimate online travel company that facilitate flight reservations, cannot escape from its liability, especially when it was duty bound to provide service to the consumer as provided under The Consumer Protection Act.

 

5.   Thus the aforesaid act of OP No.2 amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on its part, especially when the entire case set up by the complainant in the consumer complaint as well as the evidence available on record is unrebutted by the OP No.2. Hence, the instant consumer complaint deserves to be allowed.
6. Since admittedly an amount of Rs.7800/- partially has been refunded to the complainant by the OP No.2 against the total fair of Rs.37172/-  for to and fro journey from Chandigarh to Mumbai and Mumbai to Chandigarh and the one way journey cost comes to Rs.18586/- which was refundable to the complainant and out of which only Rs.7800/- has been refunded, thus the complainant is entitled for refund of the balance amount of Rs.10786/-.

4. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds, the same is hereby partly allowed and OP  No.2 is directed as under :-

1. to pay ₹10586/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from 25.8.2021 when the  partial travel amount was refunded to the complainant till onwards.
2. to pay an amount of ₹2000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
3. to pay ₹3000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

5. This order be complied with by the OP No.2 within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.
7. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced 5/12/2023 mp			Sd/- [Pawanjit Singh] President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur] Member