Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President

1.       The complainants  have filed the instant complaint under section 12 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019)  on the allegations that complainants No.1 and 2 booked travel flight tickets on 16.03.2019 from Opposite Party for New Delhi to Edmonton for 29.10.2019 and return ticket from Edmonton to New Delhi for 16.01.2020 vide tickets No. 5893476452134 and 5893476452135 of Jet Airways vide PNR No.QDVFVI and paid Rs.1,29,860/-. Similarly, complainant No.3 also booked travel flight ticket from Opposite Party on 20.02.2019 for New Delhi to Edmonton vide Ticket no. 5893475095792 vide PNR No.YLFHKF of Jet Airways and paid Rs.53,280/- to the Opposite Party. Further alleges that said Jet Airways has closed its business and the complainants are entitled to get the refund of the amount paid to Opposite Party alongwith interest. The complainant approached on so many occasions to the Opposite Party to do the needful, but to no affect. Not only this, the complainants also served legal notice upon the Opposite Party and in reply, the Opposite Party also demanded the details as required by them, but despite supplying all the details and completing all the formalities, the complainants got no response from the Opposite Party.    In this way, said conduct of the Opposite Parties clearly amounts to deficiency in service and as such, the Complainants left with no other alternative but to file the present complaint.  Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)       Opposite Party may be directed to refund the amount of Rs.1,83,140/- in regards to booking of tickets with the Opposite Party and also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- on account of compensation for causing them mental tension and harassment or any  other relief to which this District Consumer Commission may deem fit be also granted.

2.       Opposite Party  appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing  the written version  on the ground inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and that the complaint is absolutely false and frivolous. It is submitted that Opposite Party is a consumer centric company which is managed through online web portal i.e. www.goibibo.com and mobile application namely ‘Goibibo’ and it provides all the travel related unblemished services and information to its customers, but not limited to air tickets, railways ticketing, bus booking, hotel bookings at very competitive prices.  The Opposite Party merely acts as a facilitator for booking the confirmed air tickets/ hoel bookings on behalf of its customers with the concerned  service providers and the Opposite Party upon the request received from its customer, forwards the same to the concerned Airlines/ service providers through software’s embedded on its web portal. Upon receiving the confirmation from concerned service providers, the Booking ID is generated and confirmed bookings/ tickets is shared with the customer. It is admitted that the complainants made booking through Opposite Party and paid Rs.1,29,860/- and Rs.53,280/- on account of travel amount for booking from New Delhi to Edmonton-jet Airways dated 29.10.2019, Edmonton to New Delhi-Jet Airways dated 16.01.2020 and New Delhi to Edmonton-jet Airways dated 16.05.2019. The Opposite Party being the facilitator between the concerned service provider and the intended traveller was under the obligation to provide the confirmed  booking/ tickets to its customer. Once the confirmed ticket is issued to the customer, the Opposite Party is discharged from its obligations and duties qua the said booking and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party.   On merits, the Opposite Party took up almost the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections.    Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint was made.

3.       In order to  prove  his  case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1  alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C12 and closed his evidence.

4.       On the other hand,  to rebut the evidence of the complainant,  Opposite Party tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Ekant Mehra Ex.OP1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP8 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Party.

5.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties, perused the written submissions filed by the Opposite Party and  gone through the documents placed  on record.

6.       During the course of arguments, both the ld.counsel for the Complainant as well as Opposite Party have mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint as well as in the written reply  respectively. We have perused the rival contentions of  the parties and also gone through the record on file. The main contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant is that complainants No.1 and 2 booked travel flight tickets on 16.03.2019 from Opposite Party for New Delhi to Edmonton for 29.10.2019 and return ticket from Edmonton to New Delhi for 16.01.2020 vide tickets No. 5893476452134 and 5893476452135 of Jet Airways vide PNR No.QDVFVI and paid Rs.1,29,860/-. Similarly, complainant No.3 also booked travel flight ticket from Opposite Party on 20.02.2019 for New Delhi to Edmonton vide Ticket no. 5893475095792 vide PNR No.YLFHKF of Jet Airways and paid Rs.53,280/- to the Opposite Party. Further contended that said Jet Airways has closed its business and the complainants are entitled to get the refund of the amount paid to Opposite Party alongwith interest. The complainant approached on so many occasions to the Opposite Party to do the needful, but to no affect. On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Party has  repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the complainants on the ground that the Opposite Party only provides all the travel related unblemished services and information to its customers, but not limited to air tickets, railways ticketing, bus booking, hotel bookings at very competitive prices.  The Opposite Party merely acts as a facilitator for booking the confirmed air tickets/ hoel bookings on behalf of its customers with the concerned  service providers and the Opposite Party upon the request received from its customer, forwards the same to the concerned Airlines/ service providers through software’s embedded on its web portal. Upon receiving the confirmation from concerned service providers, the Booking ID is generated and confirmed bookings/ tickets is shared with the customer. It is however, admitted that the complainants made booking through Opposite Party and paid Rs.1,29,860/- and Rs.53,280/- on account of travel amount for booking from New Delhi to Edmonton-jet Airways dated 29.10.2019, Edmonton to New Delhi-Jet Airways dated 16.01.2020 and New Delhi to Edmonton-jet Airways dated 16.05.2019. The Opposite Party being the facilitator between the concerned service provider and the intended traveller was under the obligation to provide the confirmed  booking/ tickets to its customer. Once the confirmed ticket is issued to the customer, the Opposite Party is discharged from its obligations and duties qua the said booking. In the present case, it is admitted by the Opposite Party that they have duly initiated the refund process towards the complainants and the same has been forwarded to the concerned airlines and the concerned airlines refund or reschedule the tickets or bookings in lie of charges duly agreed upon at the time of making the booking. But as per the version of the complainants, they have not received the amount so far. Since the complainants are wandering here and there for the refund of their hard earned money, now it is the vicarious liability of the Opposite Party who remained as facilitator of Jet Airways, to get refund the amount of the complainants.  As such, we are of the view that there is certainly a deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party who have failed to get the amount of the complainant refunded from Jet Airways with them the complainants have booked their air tickets.  The Opposite Party has cited the rulings in support of their contentions, but these are not applicable to the facts of the present case and the same are distinguished.      

7.       In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and direct the Opposite Party to refund the amount of Rs.1,83,140/- (Rupees one lakh eighty three thousands one hundred and forty only) to the complainants alongwith interest @ 8% per annum from the respective deposit dates with Opposite Party till   its actual realization.  The compliance of this order be made by the Opposite Party within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the Complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Commission. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

8.       Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.

          This complaint could not be decided within the prescribed period because the State Government has not appointed any of the Whole Time Members in this Commission for about 3 years i.e. w.e.f. 15.09.2018 till 27.08.2021 as well as due to pandemic of COVID-19.

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:07.06.2022.