Delhi

East Delhi

CC/494/2013

UDAY KR. NAIK - Complainant(s)

Versus

IBIBO WEB - Opp.Party(s)

09 Nov 2017

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.          494/ 2013

                                                                                                  Date of Institution                   11/06/2013

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on                  09/11/2017

                                                                                                  Date of Order                           13/11/2017                                                                                                            

In matter of

Mr. Uday Kumar Naik, Adult   

B-401, Kapilvastu, Bldg.no. 1,

Kolbad Road, Thane(W), Maharastra……………………....…………….Complainant

 

                                                                               VS

1-ibibo web Pvt Ltd.   

F-130, GF,Street no. 7,  

Pandav Nagar, Delhi 110091

 

2-Spice Jet Ltd.

319, Udhyog Vihar, Gurgaon, Haryana, 122016…………………..….Opponents

 

 

Quorum                                 Shri Sukhdev Singh                  President

                                                Dr P N Tiwari                             Member

                                                Mrs Harpreet Kaur                   Member

                                               

Order by   Dr P N Tiwari    Member                       

 

Brief Facts of the case                                   

 

This complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of C P Act, 1986 r/w sub section 2(1)(g) for deficiency in services against OP1 & 2 for unethically deducting amount for air tickets in case of cancellation of tickets by complainant.

The complainant booked three tickets through online portal OP1/ Ibibo Web Pvt Ltd. for Kathmandu, Nepal with his family on vacations from 19/05/2013 to 25/05/2013 and paid a sum of Rs 30,190/-to OP1 (Anne. 1) and received to and fro ticket through OP1.  

The complainant checked requirements of passport of his family with Immigration department. It was told that valid Govt. ID proof of members would be required and no passport was required in Nepal.

It was reconfirmed from OP2/ Spice Jet Airlines that complainant had valid passport and his wife who was also a State Govt. employee had no passport, but had valid ID proof as Pan Card, Driving Licence and birth certificate. It was replied by the customer relation person of OP2 that Govt ID as passport or Voter’s ID card were allowed by OP2 in Nepal, but birth certificate of adults were not a valid proof except for children aged below 24 months were allowed. Complainant wrote various emails to OP2 for getting clearance, but even after getting reply from OP2, was not satisfied, so decided to cancel the tickets. Thus, complainant cancelled the tickets and received amount as sum of Rs 16,990/- from OP1 (Anne.2).

 

It was stated that due to deficient services of OPs, complainant’s summer tour was spoiled. Felt harassed and financial loss and unfair trade practice, filed this complaint for refund of entire amount along with all the expenditure done by him for trip and claimed refund of illegally deducted amount Rs 13,200/- with Rs one lakh for harassment.

On receiving notice, OP 1 and 2 submitted written statement separately and denying all the allegations put by the complainant. OP1 stated that they were online portal and operated independently and provide complete travel solutions as intermediary service provider in facilitating ticket bookings as per complainant’s demand in a particular airline. So, OP1 were a passive conduit for various service providers.

 

It was submitted that complainant had booked tickets through online portal only after reading all the terms and conditions in correctness, accuracy and reliability. All such terms were attached with every airline as an International Flight Booking Terms and OP1 was not responsible for any authenticity of required documents by OP2/airlines. It was stated that whenever a ticket was booked through any online portal, all such booked tickets were subject to cancellation charges irrespective of class of booking in airlines and OP1 charged their service fee as Rs 500/- per passenger per journey on all cancellation, if done so. OP1 had acted in accordance to the terms and conditions airlines, so there was no deficiency in their services (Ann. 1 & 1A).    

 

 

OP2 / Spice Jet Ltd. submitted written statement that there was no territorial jurisdiction as no cause of action arose in this Forum as OP2 neither had their branch office or residing in the territory of this Forum. It was submitted that merely booking ticket at a particular place through travel agent would not confirm any jurisdiction upon the courts situated at that place, so this complaint may be dismissed. It was admitted that complainant booked three tickets from Delhi to Kathmandu through an agent/OP1 and was sent a detail terms and condition pertaining to international airlines ticket booking terms and conditions where all the required information were listed.

 

It was submitted that tickets were cancelled by complainant on 17/05/2013 through internet and after deducting amount a sum of Rs 11,110/-as per OP2 terms and conditions under clause 3.2.3 where it had been mentioned that a sum of Rs 1850/- per person would be deducted in case of cancellation per person, so in all 11,110/- deducted and balance amount Rs 18,468/- was remitted by OP2 through OP1 to the complainant. Thus, there was no deficiency on the part of OP2. Hence, this complaint may be dismissed.  

 

Complainant submitted his rejoinder and evidence on affidavit and affirmed himself on oath that OP had deducted amount from his booked tickets by way of unfair means and complainant had paid entire payment from his own pocket for his trip.

 

OP1 also submitted their evidences on affidavit through Mr Jagdeep Singh working as AR with OP1 and affirmed on oath that OP1 had submitted evidences were correct and true and were on record and acted as per terms and conditions of international airlines booking and cancellation conditions. OP2 did not file their evidences or put their appearance on the date of arguments.

So arguments were heard from complainant and file was perused and order was reserved. 

After seeing the facts of the case and evidences on record, it was observed that the present case, complainant has not filed any concrete evidence to prove deficiency and unfair practice by which complainant was cheated.

 

There was no evidence on record which could prove that complainant complainant’s amount was deducted unethically and amounts unfair trade practice by OP1 and 2.

We come to the conclusion that present case has no merit hence deserves to be dismissed so dismissed without cost.

 

The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per Section 18 of the Consumer Protection regulations, 2005 (in short CPR) and file be consigned to the Record Room under Section 20(1) of the CPR.

 

(Dr) P N Tiwari, Member                                                                         Mrs Harpreet Kaur-Member

 

                                                                  Sukhdev Singh, President