Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/69/2018

Krishnan Nair - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indigo Airlines & Others - Opp.Party(s)

P N Radhakrishnan

28 Nov 2022

ORDER

                                                                                                                                 Date of Complaint Filed : 03.01.2018

                                                                                                                                  Date of Reservation        : 21.11.2022

                                                                                                                                  Date of Order                   : 28.11.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:  TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                         : PRESIDENT

                     THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,         :  MEMBER  I 

                 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 69/2018

MONDAY, THE 28^th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

 

Mr.Krishnan Nair,

S/o. Neelakandan Nair,

New No.30, Old No.111,

Gill Nagar Extension,

Choolaimedu,

Chennai - 600 094.                                                                                                                       ...  Complainant

-Vs-

 

1. Go Airlines (India) Ltd.,

    1^st Floor, C-1, Wadia International Centre (WIC),

    Pandurang, Budhkar Marg, Worli,

    Mumbai-400 025.

 

   Also at:

   Go Airlines (India) Ltd.,

   Kamaraj Domestic Airport,

   Chennai-600 027.

 

2. M/s.Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd.,

    10^th Floor, Tower C, Unitech Cyber Park,

     ector-39, Gurgaon-122002,

     Haryana.

 

     Also at:

     Yatra Online Pvt. Ltd.,

     No.90, Basement floor, Ganesh Towers,

     Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore,

     Chennai - 600 004.                                                                                                                              ...  Opposite parties

******

Counsel for the Complainant            : M/s. P.N. Radhakrishnan

Counsel for the Opposite Parties       : Exparte

 

        On perusal of records, and upon hearing the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Complainant, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by President, Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.     The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- including the differential price of the tickets that was purchased by the Complainant and his family on 25.07.2017,  as damages for the gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties together with interest thereon @18% p.a from 17.08.2017 onwards till date of realization along with cost of this complaint.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

      The Complainant and his wife, both Senior Citizens aged 70 and 63 respectively, are residing at Chennai. The Complainant's daughter and her family consisting of her husband and their two children aged 7 months and 7 years all British Citizens and Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs) had come down to Chennai from the UK on 10.07.2017 on an earned vacation for five weeks, during which period they were staying at the Complainant's house. The Complainant along with family consisting of his wife, daughter, son- in-law Priyank Shah and their two children, totally numbering six persons, had proposed to travel from Chennai to Hyderabad on 25.07.2017 as they were scheduled to visit a temple at Hyderabad for an important puja ceremony for the Complainant's daughter's new born son in Hyderabad that had been fixed on 26.07.2017. For this purpose his son-in-law had booked a flight for all six of them in the airline belonging to the 1^st Opposite Party through its agent the 2^nd Opposite Party, vide Flight Booking Reference TRULWS dated 23.01.2017 at a cost of Rs.22,137/-, and the tickets were booked well in advance from the UK itself in the month of January 2017. After booking the flight his son-in-law Priyank Shah also received intimation from the 2^nd Opposite Party by SMS on 24.07.2017 reminding him about the flight scheduled on 25.07.2017, which instilled the bona fide belief in the Complainant and his family that the flight was operational. The Complainant’s son-in-law further checked the PNR number on the website of the 1^st Opposite Party which disclosed the PNR to be valid with the flight scheduled to depart as normal on 25.07.2017. On 25.07.2017 when they approached the counter of the 1^st Opposite Party for checking in their baggage after completing the baggage scan, they were rudely shocked to be informed that the 1^st Opposite Party had stopped operating flights in the Chennai - Hyderabad sector since the last three months, and the representative of the 1^st Opposite Party resorted to giving silly excuses nonchalantly.

The Complainant along with his son-in-law then met the Manager of the 1^st  Opposite Party at the airport and sought help in arranging a paid alternate flight to Hyderabad, since the Complainant and his family could not avoid the puja scheduled at Hyderabad that had been planned by them very much earlier, and which was one of the prime reasons for his daughter and her family to travel to India. The Complainant states that the Manager Mr. Maheshwaran (Staff ID: 4597) callously informed the Complainant and his son-in-law that the 1^st Opposite Party did not have any code share with any other airline in order to arrange an alternate flight, and that it was not his lookout as the representative of the 1^st Opposite Party to make customers happy by providing paid tickets by alternate flights especially since the flight had been cancelled. When his son-in-law enquired from the Manager as to why the refund of the value of the tickets had not been done when the flight had been cancelled, the Manager informed him that refunds could be processed and paid only if and when the customers came to the airport and not otherwise. When the Complainant and his son-in-law were speaking to Manager of the AAI, the said Manager of the 1^st Opposite Party clandestinely deactivated the PNR number that exposed his lie. When questioned immediately, the said Manager of the 1^st Opposite Party denied that he had deactivated the PNR, and he validated the PNR again. The Complainant and his son-in-law had to book flights for the six of them by another airline for the same day's flight to Hyderabad at an exorbitant cost of Rs.50,549.00 in order to conduct the scheduled puja that was of the utmost importance to them. Even after two weeks elapsed since the date of the scheduled flight, his son-in-law did not receive the refund of the money that he had paid for the tickets booked on the airline of the 1^st  Opposite Party through the 2^nd Opposite Party. The cancellation of the flight by the 1^st Opposite Party and the non-intimation of the same to the Complainant or his son-in-law at any time thereafter by either of the Opposite Parties; coupled with the conduct of the 2^nd Opposite Party in making the Complainant and his family believe the flight to be valid and subsisting; as well as the attitude and conduct of the representatives and Manager of the 1^st Opposite Party at the airport; and the utter disregard and callousness that the representatives exhibited towards the Complainant and his family; clearly establishes the gross deficiency in service by both the Opposite Parties. The temple in Hyderabad was of the utmost importance, and had been booked at substantial cost and was unavoidable, especially in view of the heavy rush of bookings for the said puja that is unique to the said temple. The Complaint's son-in-law we constrained to cause a legal notice. The said notice has been received by both the Opposite Parties. However, while there has been no response whatsoever from the 1^st Opposite Party, the 2^nd Opposite Party has sent a reply dated 09.09.2017 to the Counsel of the Complainant's son-in-law falsely and nebulously disclaiming any liability on the ground that they were only the ticketing agents of the 1^st Opposite Party and had no role in the cancelling of flights by the 1^st Opposite Party or the intimation thereof to the ticket holders. It is submitted that the 2^nd Opposite Party, being the Agent of the 1^st Opposite Party, is equally liable for the deficiency in service. In and by the said reply the 2^nd Opposite Party however intimated the Counsel that refund of the flight charges had been received by them from the 1^st Opposite Party and had been processed by them. The Complainant submits that the said refund has since been credited to the account of the Complainant's son-in-law only on 16.08.2017. The Complainant submits that he is filing the above Complaint on behalf of himself and all the other five members who are equally aggrieved by the acts of the Opposite Parties, since his daughter and her family have since returned to the UK on 20.08.2017. Hence the complaint.

3.   The Complainant has filed his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments and on the side of the Complainant Exs.A-1 to A-8 were marked. The Opposite Parties did not appear before this Commission even after sufficient notice served and remained absent and set exparte.

Points for Consideration:-

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled?

Point No.1 :-

        Upon perusal of Ex.A-2, it is a clear that flight tickets were booked on 23.01.2017 through the 2^nd Opposite Party for the travel on 25.07.2017 from Chennai to Hyderabad in 1^st Opposite Party airlines for 6 members including the Complainant. The contention of the Complainant is that his daughter along with her family had come down to Chennai from U.K mainly to conduct the puja at Hyderabad.

        From Ex.A-3, it is seen that on 24.07.2017 Priyank Shah, Son-in-law of Complainant who booked tickets received intimation from the 2^nd Opposite Party conforming their travel on 25.07.2017 from Chennai to Hyderabad in the flight of the 1^st Opposite Party. However on 25.07.2017 when the Complainant and his family members checked in at the Chennai domestic Air port they were informed that the 1^st Opposite Party had stopped operating flights in the Chennai – Hyderabad Sector since last 3 months. The Opposite Parties had not made any alternate arrangements for their travel to Hyderabad. The Complainant and his son-in-law Priyank Shah had to book another flight and a exorbitant cost of Rs.50,549/- to conduct Puja at Hyderabad which is one of their prime reason for their travel to India.

        On 17.08.2017 the Complainant had sent a legal notice calling upon the Opposite Parties to pay the flight ticket charges and for compensation. The 2^nd Opposite Party in response to the legal notice had given a reply on 09.09.2017, Ex.A-8 stating that they were merely a booking platform and not principal service provider and that the grievance of the Complainant is related to the acts and omission of the airlines, the 1^st Opposite Party and that due to their efforts, they got refund of Rs.22,137/- from the 1^st Opposite Party which refund was processed by the 2^nd Opposite Party and hence they are not liable for loss or damages suffered by the Complainant.

        On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is seen that the Complainant and his family members were not intimated about the cancellation of flights either by the 1^st Opposite Party Airlines or the 2^nd Opposite Party for their scheduled travel on 25.07.2017. It is pertinent to note that when the 1^st Opposite Party had stopped flights for few months, the intimation given by 2^nd Opposite Party one day prior to travel on 25.07.2017, confirming their travel on 26.07.2017, when no such flight was available on 26.07.2017, amounts to negligence on the part of the Opposite Parties. The Opposite Parties had also failed to make alternate arrangements for the travel of the Complainant and his family members for their travel to Hyderabad from Chennai, due to which the Complainant and his family members had to book flight at a higher cost. The Complainant and his family members consisting of children were made to suffer due to the careless and negligent attitude of the Opposite Parties and hence the Complainant had to be compensated for the deficiency on the part of the Opposite Parties. Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered in favour of the Complainant.

Point Nos.2 and 3:-

        As discussed and decided in Point No.1 the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs. 28,412/- being the differential price of the air tickets after deducting the amount paid together with interest @9% p.a from 25.07.2017 till date of realisation and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties along with cost of Rs.5,000/-. Accordingly, Point Nos.2 and 3 are answered.

​In the result the Complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally directed to pay a sum of Rs.28,412/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Thousand Four Hundred and Twelve Only) being the differential price of the air tickets together withinterest @9% p.a from 25.07.2017 till date of realisation and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) as compensation for the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties along with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Complainant, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

In the result the Complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 28^th of November 2022. 

 

T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                                                          B.JIJAA

      MEMBER I                                                            PRESIDENT

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

Ex.A1	-	Passports of the Complainants family Members with travel endorsements
Ex.A2	23.01.2017	Flight e-Tickets from Chennai to Hyderabad for 25.07.2017 on 1st Opposite Party’s airlines purchased from England Through 2nd Opposite Party
Ex.A3	24.07.2017	Download of PNR status and itinerary from 1st Opposite Party’s Website
Ex.A4	25.07.2017	Deactivation of PNR of Complainant a Chennai Airport
Ex.A5	25.07.2017	Flight Tickets from Chennai to Hyderabad for same date (purchased at Chennai) for Complainant and family
Ex.A6	17.08.2017	Legal Notice by Complainant’s Counsel to Opposite Parties
Ex.A7	-	Acknowledgement cards Opposite Parties to Complainant’s Counsel
Ex.A8	09.09.2017	Reply to legal notice by 2nd Opposite Party to Complainant’s Counsel

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties:-

                                                                            NIL

 

T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                                                          B.JIJAA

      MEMBER I                                                            PRESIDENT