BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 07^TH DAY OF MARCH 2024

ORDER

SMT.M.SHOBHA, PRESIDENT

1. The complaint has been filed under Section 12 of C.P.Act (hereinafter referred as an Act) through online against the OP for grant of Rs.5,00,000/- for complete airfare, base fare, transaction fee, convenience fee, including transaction fee and for other reliefs.

2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The complainant being an executive with an MNC and residing at Bangalore has purchased airline ticket from one GoFirst Airlines from Bangalore airport to Pucket Airport, Thailand, via OP travel agent on 29.04.2023 by paying an amount of Rs.13,862/-. The date of travel was 10.05.2023.

3. It is further case of the complainant that the OP failed to provide the notification of flight cancellation by any mode of communication till today. The complainant learnt about the cancellation via media sources news articles and emailed Happyfares on 10.05.2023 asking them why a notice of cancellation was not shared with the complainant. But none of the OP company have informed him about the cancellation which made it impossible for the complainant to reschedule his trip as he had approved leaves starting from 10.05.2023 and last minute rescheduling was not possible due to the nature of his work.  If the OP notified about the cancellation in advance it would have been possible for this complainant to find an alternative way to carry on his trip.  He had to cancel his plans altogether and it gave him immense mental stress as he has planned this much needed vacation to destress.

4. It is further contention taken by the complainant that the first response from OP was received on 10.05.2023 at 3.58 pm., after the schedule time of the flight at 7.45 am on 10.05.2023 from Bangalore airport to Pucket Airport Thailand expressing sorry that the flight has been cancelled.  No response was provided why the OP failed to notify this complainant about the cancellation. Their response was very generic mentioning that a refund will be initiated and it may take 30 days to refund the amount, due to quote “heavy cancellations”.  

5. The complainant has sent email to the OP on 30.05.2023 asking them how large number of cancellations could justify their inability to notify the customers about the cancellation of their flight and that this explanation has no ground.  The complainant further informed the OP that this is a deficiency of service on their part and he will lodge a formal court complaint with consumer court. But the OP have not provided any response.  The complainant again sent mail on 06.06.2023 and also sent a legal notice seeking compensation of Rs.90,000/- due to mental stress and due to cancellation of the trip but they have sent a generic response stating that due to large number of cancellation and heavy back log they were not able to process the refund and are actively working on it. After that they completely ignored the legal notice sent by the complainant.  The OP neither acknowledged the notice nor sent any reply except the statement that they will refund the process in 30 days. Even after 30 days the OP failed to send any refund. When the OPs have failed to refund the amount the complainant was forced to file this complaint before this commission.

6. In response to the notice, OP has sent their written statement with copy of the order passed by the NCLT, New Delhi Special Bench, in Company Petition No.(1B)-264(PB)/2023 dated 10.05.2023 in the matter of Go Airlines Limited.   The OPs have sent the letter after this commission has placed them exparte on 24.08.2023.  The reply sent by the OP received by this Commission on 15.09.2023 within 45 days from the date of order placing exparte. Hence the reply filed by the OP is taken on record.

7. The contention taken by the OP is that they have been served with the complaint petition sent by this commission.  They have denied all the averments made in the complaint except the fact that the complainant had booked flight tickets from their website from Bangalore to Pucket on 29.04.2023 for a journey day on 10.05.2023 on GoFirst airline.  This OP are “Travelogy India” is a outsource commission agent for GoFirst airline tickets only and it is the duty of the GoFirst Airliner to intimate/message/inform the consumers/ travelers etc., about the flight status for any delay or cancellation or suspension of flights. Hence the question of unfair trade practice or deficiency in service does not imply upon the agents i.e., this OP as there are no intentional or deliberate defects on their part.

8. It is further contention taken by the OP is that the complainant has not made the GoFirst airlines India Pvt. Ltd., as a party in this complaint and the complaint is suffered from non-joinder of necessary parties and liable to be dismissed.  

9. It is further case of the OP that due to the GoAirlines (India) ltd., bankruptcy had ceased their operational flights. The OPs have made payment before making any booking from the GoFirst Airlines. They have not received any refund amount from GoFirst till date. They have already made claims dated 24.05.2023 for refund before the NCLT New Delhi and the same will be refunded to the complainant as soon as they receive the same.  The complainant has booked the tickets for GoFirst as his choice and these OPs have only providing tickets as outsourced commission agents and had no control over the operation of the flights of the GoFirst. The matter is pending before the NCLT and the GoAirlines India Ltd., had ceased to operate. The provision mentioned by the complainant u/s 12 of the C.P. Act is a wrong provision and the complaint is not admissible and liable to be rejected out rightly. Hence OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint as not maintainable either in law or on facts for misjoinder of necessary parties.

10. Though sufficient time was given to both the parties they have not appeared and not filed their affidavit evidence. Hence affidavit evidence of both the parties is taken as nil. Both the parties have not addressed their arguments. Hence arguments of both the parties are also taken as nil.

11. The following points arise for our consideration as are:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

12. Our answers to the above points are as under:

Point No.1:  Affirmative

Point No.2: Affirmative in part

Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

13. Point No.1 AND 2: These two points are inter related and hence they have taken for common discussion.  We have perused the allegations made in the complaint, version and documents since both the parties have not led any evidence and not submitted their arguments.

14. It is undisputed fact that the complainant booked air ticket through OP company from Bangalore airport to Pucket airport Thailand on 29.04.2023 by paying a total sum of Rs.13,862/- and the date of travel was 10.05.2023. The OPs being the travel agents failed to provide the notification of flight cancellation by any mode of communication till today.

15. The complainant learnt about the cancellation via media sources, news articles and emailed to OP on 10.05.2023 asking why a notice of cancellation was not shared with him and none of the officials in the OP company have informed him about the cancellation.

16. On the other hand, the contention taken by the OP is that due to GoFirst Bankruptcy the airlines have ceased their operations. These OPs are only commission agents of GoFirst Airlines. They have made the payment before any booking from GoFirst Airlines. Due to their bankruptcy this OP has not received any amount. Now the matter is pending before NCLT. They will process the refund whenever they receive the amount from the airlines and the refund will be processed only after the judgement of the NCLT. The OPs have also enclosed the copy of the order passed by the NCLT relating to Go Airlines in Company Petition No.(IB)-264(PB)/2023.

17. It is also the grievance of the OPs that they are the outsourced commission agents for GoFirst airline tickets only and it is the duty of the GoFirst airliner to intimate/message or inform the consumers/travelers etc., about the flight status for any delay or cancellation or suspension of flights.  Hence the question of unfair trade practice or deficiency in services does not imply upon the agents i.e., the OP.  

18. It is also clear from the documents placed by both the parties before this Commission, due to bankruptcy of the go Airlines (India) ltd., has ceased their operation of flight. It is the duty of the Go Airlines to inform or sent message to the complainant about the cancellation or suspension of their flights, but they have not at all sent any intimation to the complainant. In view of this, the complainant was forced to cancel his trip and it was impossible for him to reschedule his trip as he has approved leaves starting from 10^th May 2023. If the OPs have informed the cancellation in advance it would have been possible for him to find an alternative way to carry on his trip. The complainant suffered immense mental stress as he has to cancel his plans altogether and he needed vacation to destress.

19. The complainant has booked the air tickets through the OPs.  It is the duty of the OPs to inform the complainant about the cancellation or suspension of the flights by go airlines as they are the outsourcing commission agents for GoFirst airlines.  Instead of informing the complainant about the suspension of airlines by the GoFirst airlines, the OPs negligently have not at all informed the complainant and they are responsible for the mental agony and financial loss suffered by the complainant.  When the complainants have booked the air tickets through the OPs he cannot claim the charges from the GoFirst airlines.

20. Under these circumstances, the complainant was forced to file this complaint against the OP.  If the OPs have informed the complainant in advance the complainant would have rescheduled in vacation and he would have enjoyed his travel for destress.  Hence the complainant has clearly established the negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the OPs. Therefore the complainant is entitle for the relief.  

21. The relief claimed by the complainant for an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- is on the higher side. Hence we feel it is necessary to award an amount of Rs.10,000/- for the mental agony and the complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.13,862/- the complete airfare from the OPs with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.  Hence we answer point No.1 in affirmative and point No.2 partly in affirmative.

22. Point No.3:- In view the discussion referred above we proceed to pass the following;

O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. Op is hereby directed to refund an amount of Rs.13,862/- with interest at the rate of 10% p.a., from the date of payment till realization.
3. OP is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant.
4. The OP shall comply this order within 60 days from this date, failing which the OP shall pay interest at 12% p.a. after expiry of 60 days on Rs.13,862/- till final payment.
5. Furnish the copy of this order and return the extra pleadings and documents to the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 07^TH day of MARCH 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

NIL

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;

    NIL