BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM; FATEHABAD.

 Complaint Case No.105 of 2017.

 Date of Instt.:5.5.2017/8.5.2017.

Date of Decision:13 .12 .2017.

1.Pardeep Kumar Jindal son of Sh.Raj Kumar Jindal, 2.Rachna Jindal wife of Pardeep Jindal, 3.Rakesh Kumar Jindal son of Sh.Raj Kumar, 4.Saloni Jindal wife of Rakesh Jindal, all residents of 21-M.C. Colony Fatehabad, Tehsil and District Fatehabad.

                                                                                                                              ..Complainants

                                                              Versus

1.Indigo Central Wing, Ground Floor, Thapar House, 124-Janpath, New Delhi through its Authorized Signatory.

2.Indigo, Level 1, Tower C, Global Business Park, Mahorali Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon through its Authorized Signatory.

                 ..Respondents/OPs

Before:                  Sh.Raghbir Singh, President.

                                              Sh.R.S.Panghal, Member.

Mrs.Ansuya Bishnoi, Member.

Present:                                Sh.Sudhir Garhwal, Adv. for the complainants.

                                              Sh.Vishnu Delu, Adv. for the OPs.

ORDER

                                              The present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainants against the OPs with the averments that they planned a trip to Bombay along-with their children and for that they booked seven return air tickets for themselves and their minor children from New Delhi to Mumbai for Wednesday i.e. 22.02.2017 of Flight No.6E-171 and return tickets from Mumbai to New Delhi for Sunday i.e. 26.03.2017 of flight No.6E-248 through Yatra.com of Air-line Indigo managed by the OPs and a total amount  of Rs.36,687/- was charged from the complainants by Yatra.com on behalf of Ops at the time of booking. The booking of said air-ticket was confirmed by Yatra.com vide e-mail dated 31.01.2017, Tuesday at 11.00 p.m. with booking reference No.3101730184808 and E-Tickets attached with this e-mail mentioning details as air-lines PNR KBCRNJ Departure,  arrival, duration time, flight number and date etc.

2.                           It is further submitted that on 22.02.2017 the complainants along-with their children reached at Delhi Airport terminal- 1D at about 4.00 a.m. and lined themselves and their children at OP Air-line counter No.D for getting their boarding passes and to deposit of luggage. The boarding passes with sitting numbers in the name of the complainants and their children were issued by concerned employee of OPs attending the counter No. D and thereafter instructed the complainants to go to counter No.H on account of rush at counter No.D for depositing their luggage. On this the complainants lined up at counter No.H to deposit their luggage. However after standing in line for 15 to 20 minutes the complainants were again told by concerned employees attending at counter No.H to go back on counter No.D to deposit their luggage as boarding passes were issued to them through counter No.D and on account of this process 30 to 35 minutes of the complainants were wasted by employees of the OPs standing at counter No.D and counter No.H.

3.                           It is further submitted that in hurry the complainants agains reached at counter No.D with their luggage to deposit the luggage at that counter. However the employee attending the counter No.D informed the complainants that they have become late and their luggage cannot be deposited and they can board on the airplane without their luggage. It was also told by the employees of the OPs at that time that if they still want to deposit their luggage in that eventuality they will have to pay Rs.64,000/- extra for the luggage or the complainants can take the next flight to Mumbai after paying  the difference of fare with the next flight.

4.                           It is further submitted that on account of the above said wrongful act of the employees of the OPs attending at counter D and counter H, the complainants and their children could not be able to board on the flight No.6E-171 to go to Mumbai. On account of the above said act the mood of the complainants and their children was spoiled and as such they cancelled their trip to Mumbai and returned back to their home. It is also further submitted that the complainants had also cancelled their and their children return tickets from Mumbai to New Delhi booked for 26.03.2017. Thereafter the complainants requested the OPs time and again and also sent e-mail to OPs to get back the charges charged at the time of booking of said air tickets but all in vain.

5.                           It is further submitted that the above said act on the part of OPs amounts to deficiency and unfair trade practice in rendering service to the complainants and as such the complainants are entitled to get a compensation of Rs.50,000/- per person as compensation along-with an amount of Rs.36,687/- charged by the OPs at the time of booking of air tickets. Hence, this present complaint.

6.                           On being served the OPs appeared and resisted the complaint by filing a joint written statement wherein various preliminary objection with regard to maintainability, locus-standi and cause of action, have been raised. It is further submitted that as per Inter Glob Aviation Limited  database which constitutes  the primary record for air travel  the complainants  booked an air ticket from Delhi to Mumbai for travel on 22.02.2017on Indigo Flight No.6E-171.The said air tickets were booked under PNR KBCRNJ. The scheduled time of departure of the above said flight was 5.30 a.m.

7.                           It is further submitted that the said booking was governed by certain terms and conditions for carriage known as “IndiGo Conditions of Carriage- Domestic” which were available at the website of InterGlobe Aviation Limited and same were also known to the complainant and agreed to at the time of booking. The said terms and condition constituted a binding contractual agreement for air carriage with InterGlobe Aviation Limited. The bookings were only accepted after acceptance of the IndiGo CoC by or on behalf of the complainant as a matter of normal practice. The IndiGo conditions of carriage were also referred in the air tickets and are also available at the airport on request. It is further submitted that the conditions of carriage of IndiGo has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case cited as (2011) 7 SCC 463.

8.                           It is further submitted that a perusal of relevant clauses of conditions of carriage makes it clear that the present complaint is baseless, devoid of merits.  As per Article 8.1 of the above said conditions IndiGo recommends that Customers report for Check-in at least 2 hours prior to the departure of the scheduled flight. IndiGo reserves the right to cancel a Customer’s reservation if he/ she does not comply with the check-in timelines. As per the above article check-in closes 45 minutes prior to the scheduled departure of the flight.

…

Failure to complete the check-in formalities within the stipulate time limit would result in forfeiture of the booking amount. The booking would be declared a ‘No Show” and the Customers would not be entitled to a refund or a credit. However, only the PSF and UDF may be refunded to the customer upon request made by the customer to IndiGo.

9.                           It is further submitted that in view of the above said terms and conditions the complainants were required to report to the check-in counter for IndiGo Flight No.6E-171 before 45 minutes prior to the schedule time of departure of his flight i.e. 5.30 a.m. As per Inter Globe Aviation Limited’s record and by the complainant’s own admission ion the complaint, the complainant failed to report to the check-in counter for Indigo Flight No.6E-171 before its closure. Therefore Inter Globe Aviation Ltd was compelled to treat the complainant as a “No Show” in accordance with the IndiGo CoC. Accordingly the complainant’s ticket amount was forfeited.

10.                         It is also further submitted that in accordance with the conditions of carriage the complainant is entitled to receive a refund of the Passenger Service Fee and User Development Fee. So a refund of INR 4998/- was processed to the same account through which the complainant’s booking was undertaken.

11.                         It is further submitted that completing check-in formalities within the stipulate timelines is the sole responsibility of the complainant. Further, IndiGo is not liable to the complainant for any loss or expenses incurred as a result of the complainant’s own failure to adhere to said timelines. As per Article 8.3:  IndiGo condition of carriage will not be liable to the customer for any loss or expense incurred due to their failure to comply with the provision of this Article.

12.                         It is further submitted that despite the complainant’s failure to adhere to check-in timeline, the staff of inter Globe Aviation Ltd. without any admission of liability and purely as goodwill and service gesture, offered to re-accommodate the complainant on the next available flight, subject to the payment of the necessary charges. It is also further submitted that e-mail sent by the complainants on 23.02.2017 were replied by the OPs vide e-mail dated 22.02.2017.

13.                         It is further submitted that there is no deficiency on the part of answering OPs in rendering service to the complainant and as such the present complaint is liable to be dismissed.

14.                         The parties have tendered in evidence the documents and affidavits in support of their respective contentions. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents and other material circumstances on the record from carefully.

15.                         We have duly considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have also examined the entire material placed on record of the case file. It is the case of the complainants that they could not be able to board on the flight No.6E-171 from Delhi to Mumbai on 22.2.2017 on account of inefficiency/negligence on the part of the employees of the OPs attending the counter  No.D and counter No.H whereas the complainants had reached the Airport terminal D in time. In support of their case the complainants have pleaded that the complainants along-with their children have lined up before counter D for getting their boarding passes and deposit of luggage. The boarding passes with the seat numbers were also issued by the employees of OPs attending the Counter D. But thereafter the employees attending the Counter D directed the complainants to go to Counter H for depositing the luggage on account of rush on counter Number D. However, after spending 15 to 20 minutes at counter No.H there were again told by the employees of Counter H to go to back to counter D for deposit of the luggage as boarding passes were issued at counter D. On account of this process 30 to 35 minutes of the complainants were spoiled and as such they could not report at check-in counter before 45 minutes of the departure of the flight. Therefore, the delay in report at check-in counter is attributed to the employees of the Ops and there is no delay on the part of complainants as alleged by the OPs.    

16.                         On the other hand it is the case of the OPs that booking of Air Tickets is governed by certain terms and conditions known as Conditions of Carriage and the same were made known to the complainants at the time of booking of the tickets and the same are also referred on the tickets and available on web-site of the OPs. As per Article 8.1 of the said conditions Indigo recommends that customers report for check-in at least two hours prior to the departure of the scheduled flight. Indigo reserves the right to cancel a customer’s reservation if he does not comply with the check-in time lines. As per the above Article the check-in closes 45 minutes prior to the scheduled departure of the flight.  However, in the present case as per record of the Ops and as per admission of the complainants themselves they failed to report to the check-in counter before its closure.

17.                         It is also the case of the OPs that the conditions of carriage constitute a contractual agreement and the same is binding on the parties. The conditions of carriage of the OPs airline have also been affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.

18.                         It is also the case of the OPs that completing check-in formalities within the stipulated timeline is the sole responsibility of the complainants and delay for the same in the present case is not attributable to the employees of the OPs.

19.                         We have agreed with the contention of the OPs that the conditions of carriage were made known to the complainants. We are also agreed that Conditions of Carriage constitute contractual agreement and are binding upon the parties. It is also evident from the perusal of conditions of carriage that the customer has to report on the check-in counter 45 minutes prior to the departure of flight. In the present case it is also not disputed that the complainants had reported the check-in counter after its closure. But the core issue to be decided by this Forum in the present case is as to whether the delay in reporting at the check-in counter by the complainants is attributable to the complainants or the employees of the OPs who were attending the counters. Keeping in view all the facts and position we are of the opinion that both views can be taken, so the present complaint is allowed to the extent that the complainants are entitled for getting refund of amount of booking of air tickets i.e. Rs.36,687/- charged from the complainants after deducting an amount of Rs.4,998/- in case already refunded to the complainants by the OPs. This order be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of  the copy of the order otherwise interest @ 6% per annum will have to be paid by the OPs from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

ANNOUNCED IN OPEN FORUM.                                                                      Dt.13.12.2017   

                 (Ansuya Bishnoi)               (R.S.Panghal)        (Raghbir Singh)

                    Member                 Member                               President,                                                                                                                                                                                                  District Consumer Disputes

                Redressal Forum,  Fatehabad