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

DATED 20^th DAY OF MAY 2022

ORDER

SRI.SHIVARAMA.K, PRESIDENT

1. The complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of C.P.Act, 1986 seeking for a direction to the OP to pay a sum of Rs.67,423/- plus its equal amount towards penalty.

2. It is the case of the complainant that OP is a travelling agency and the complainant had booked Air ticket through the OP to travel to Dubhai on 04.07.2017 and purchased air ticket to travel to Dubhai on 12.08.2017.  Further due to unavoidable circumstances, the complainant’s aunty passed away on 10.08.2017 due to accident and the complainant had informed the same to the OP to cancel the air ticket.  Even though, the complainant had approached the OP number of times, till the date of complaint, the OP did not pay the remaining amount of Rs.67,423/-, but had paid a sum of Rs.12,877/- through NEFT.  Hence, the complaint came to be filed.

3. The OP is placed exparte.

4. To prove the case of the complainant, complainant had filed affidavit in the form of his evidence in chief and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 documents. Heard the arguments.

5. On the basis of the pleading of the complainant and the reliefs sought, the point that would arise for our consideration are as under:-

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as sought for?
3. What order?

6. Our answer to the above points are as under:

       Point No.1:-  In affirmative.

      Point No.2:- Partly in affirmative.   

      Point No.3:-As per the final order for the following

REASONS

7. Point Nos.1 and 2: In order to avoid the repetition of facts and as both the points are interlinked, both the points are taken together for discussion.  Complainant (P.W.1) has reiterated the fact stated in the complaint in the affidavit filed in the form of his evidence in chief. According to him, he had paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- by way of cash and Rs.70,300/- through cheque on 04.07.2017 to travel to Dubhai to the OP.  To substantiate  that the amount was paid to the OP, the complainant has produced Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 documents.  It appears in Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 that complainant had paid amount of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.70,300/- respectively.  Further, according to the complainant(P.W.1) due to the death of his aunty on 10.08.2017, he could not travel to Dubhai and informed the same on the same day itself to the OP and requested to cancel the air ticket to travel to Dubhai on 12.08.2017.  Thereafter, complainant had approached the OP number of times and there was no proper response for the return of the air ticket amount.  Finally, the OP had paid a sum of Rs.12,877/- through NEFT which was credited to the account of the complainant. 
8. It is the further contention of the complainant that on the request being made for return of money number of times, the OP had paid Rs.12,877/-.  To substantiate the same, the complainant had produced bank statement, in which it appears with regard to the amount of Rs.12,877/- credited to the account of the complainant.  After deducting the above said amount, it remains a sum of Rs.67,423/-.
9. The above oral and documentary evidence has not been challenged by the OP.  The documents produced by the complainant supports its case.  Hence, we feel the complainant is entitled for return of the remaining amount of Rs.67,423/-. Since the complainant approached the OP for booking of air ticket and the OP is a Service Provider, the complainant is a Consumer within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of C.P.Act, 1986.  
10. The schedule of the travel of the complainant was on 12.08.2017 to Dhubai and return from there was 14.08.2017. The complainant had intimated about the cancellation of his travel was on 10.08.2017.  In the condition of the travel, it is stated that ticket cancelled less than 16 hours, 1 day prior to arrival will be subject to one night charge.  The complainant has intimated for cancellation of the air ticket two days prior to the travel.  Nothing is stated other than that about the cancellation charges.  The OP did not come forward to say as to why it had returned only an amount of Rs.12,877/- rather the entire ticket amount of Rs.80,300/- paid by the complainant. Section 2(1)(g) of C.P.Act, 1986 contemplates about the deficiency of service.  We feel since the OP did not return the entire amount claimed by the complainant without any reason, it amounts to imperfection and short coming on the part of the OP and it amounts to deficiency of service within the provision of the Act.
11. The complainant claimed penalty of equal amount to be payable. We feel since the complainant had approached OP number of times, even then the OP did not pay the amount.  Therefore, the complainant had sustained mental agony.  For that he is entitled for a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation and mental agony sustained.  Further, the complainant claimed interest at the rate of 18% p.a.  We feel the above said interest is excessive one.  Further, 9% interest p.a. would meet the interest of justice. Since the OP did not return cancelled air ticket amount without any explanation, we feel there is deficiency of service on the part of the OP.  Accordingly, we answer the point No.1 in affirmative and point No.2 partly in affirmative.
12. Point No.3:- In view of the discussions made above, we proceed to pass the following 

O R D E R

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.67,423/- to the complainant with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from 12.08.2017 till realization. 
3. Further, the OP is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant towards cost of litigation and mental agony sustained.
4. The OP shall comply the order within 30 days from the date of the order.
5. In the event, the OP fails to pay the said amount of Rs.10,000/- within 30 days from date of order, the same shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of order till realization.
6. Furnish the copy of this order to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 20^th day of May, 2022)

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