Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/84/2020

Paytm - Complainant(s)

Versus

Kanisth Ganeriwala - Opp.Party(s)

Puneet Kakkar Adv.

25 Feb 2022

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

 

Appeal No.	84 of 2020
Date of Institution	17.06.2020
Date of Decision	25.02.2022

Paytm C/o One 97 Communications Ltd., B-121, Sector 5, Noida 201301 (UP) through its Authorized Officer Mr. Sharadindu Mukherjee.

…..Appellant/Opposite Party

Versus

Kanisth Ganeriwala, Advocate aged 32 years son of Sh. D.N. Ganeriwala, resident of H.No.323, Advocate’s Enclave, Sector 49-A, Chandigarh.

                                                                   …..Respondent/Complainant         

BEFORE:  MRS. PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER

                MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER

               

Argued by:  Sh. Puneet Kakkar, Advocate for the Appellant.

Sh. D.N. Ganeriwala Advocate for the Respondent.

                       

PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER

              This appeal is directed against an order dated 28.02.2020, rendered by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II (now District Commission-II), U.T., Chandigarh (in the short ‘the District Commission’ only), vide which, it allowed the Consumer Complaint, with the following directions: -

“Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case and discussion, as aforesaid, we allow the present complaint with direction to the OP to refund an amount of Rs.60,609/- to the complainant. The OP is also directed to pay a compository amount of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant towards compensation for causing mental agony & harassment as well as litigation expenses.

This order shall be complied with by the OP within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which the OP shall also be liable to pay an additional compensatory amount of Rs.10000/-, apart from other relief.”

2. The facts, in brief, are that the complainant on 04.03.2019 through the website of Opposite Party i.e. Paytm.com booked 3 air-tickets of Jet Airways for onwards & return journey Chandigarh–Bangkok, Bangkok–Chandigarh respectively for himself and his family members for 12.06.2019 and 26.06.2019. It was stated that the complainant paid an amount of Rs.60,609/- through Paytm Wallet including charges of convenience fee’ of Rs.2097/- paid for the purposes of facilitating the booking of flight tickets (Annexure C-1). It was further stated that the said flight was cancelled by Jet Airways due to operational reasons on 18.04.2019 and a mail/message was sent to the complainant to claim refund of tickets directly from the travel agent from where the tickets were booked (Annexure C-2). It was further stated that the request of complainant for refund of ticket amount on account of cancellation of flight has been duly admitted and acknowledged by Opposite Party vide case No.119619907 & 119745084 dated 18.4.2019 (Annexure C-3). It was further stated that the complainant also made number of telephone calls on the helpline number of Opposite Party, but despite of all, no refund has been credited back to his account and therefore, a legal notice sent to the Opposite Party on 16.07.2019 (Annexure C-7), but to no avail. It was further stated that the aforesaid act of the Opposite Party, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. When the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint, was filed.
3. The Opposite Party filed reply and admitted the factual matrix of the case. It was stated that Jet Airways was responsible for operation and maintenance of its airlines and was liable to refund its customers in case of cancellation of its flight. It was further stated that unfortunately, Jet Airways has stopped operation of airlines and cancelled all its flights and is undergoing insolvency proceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and hence the District Forum does not have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal has already appointed Interim Insolvency Professional for Insolvency of Jet Airways (Annexure OP-2). It was further stated that the Opposite Party raised the concern with IATA (International Air Transport Association) upon which the Opposite Party received a letter from IATA stating that as per resolution process, IATA has raised its claim as a creditor before Interim Resolution Professional, which has been listed in the list of Creditors issued by Interim Resolution Professional, the same will be refunded when the Insolvency process shall be completed as per the process specified in Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Annexure OP-6). It was further stated that since with the current ongoing bankruptcy proceedings against Jet Airways, that Jet Airways went on to cancel all its operations/flights, the refund also is pending from Jet Airways and the Opposite Party which is an intermediary, can only raise a refund request on behalf of the complainant, which it rightfully did and is awaiting further intimation from Jet Airways and IATA, hence any delay that has occurred is because the dues of IATA from Jet Airways are yet to be cleared. It was further stated that there is no deficiency in service on its part, and the Opposite Party had prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. The parties led evidence, in support of their case.
5. After hearing the Counsel for the Parties, and, on going through the evidence, and record of the case, the District Commission, allowed the complaint against Opposite Party, as stated above.
6. Feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal, has been filed by the Opposite Party.
7. We have heard the Counsel for the Parties, and have gone through the evidence, and record of the case, carefully.
8. After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the contentions, advanced by the Parties, and the evidence, on record, we are of the considered opinion, that the appeal is liable to be dismissed, for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter.
9. The learned District Commission’s record shows that the complaint of the complainant was allowed alongwith the compensation and additional compensation. The respondent in this case had paid an amount of Rs.60,609/- through Paytm Wallet including charges of convenience fee of Rs.2097/- for the purposes of facilitating the booking of flight tickets. The parties had admitted that the said flight was cancelled by Jet Airways due to operational reasons on 18.04.2019 and the message was sent to the respondent to claim refund of tickets directly from the travel agent from where the tickets were booked. The respondent had made repeated requests to the appellant for refund of the deducted amount, but nothing happened because the appellant shifted its burden on the Jet Airways, since the Jet Airways stopped operation of airlines and cancelled all its flights and is undergoing insolvency proceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Further, the appellant also mentioned that the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal has already appointed Interim Insolvency Professional for Insolvency of Jet Airways and refund, if any, is to be made, is the liability of the Jet Airways. The above contentions are not palatable to this Commission. The Jet Airways themselves vide e-mails dated 19.04.2019 and 2304.2019 has informed the respondent to connect with the travel agent for refund. Since, the tickets were booked through Paytm portal in which the respondent has paid the cost of ticket alongwith the convenience fee and charges and therefore, we feel that the appellant is responsible for refund of the amount and therefore, this Commission is inclined to fall in line with the decision of the District Commission and accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed.
10. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed, with no order as to costs. The order of the District Commission is upheld.
11. Consequently, Miscellaneous Application No.393 of 2020 for staying the operation of the impugned order dated 28.02.2020 also stands dismissed, having been rendered infructuous.
12. Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.
13. The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

 

Pronounced.

25.02.2022

      

                                                                                                                                                                                                     Sd/-

[PADMA PANDEY]

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

                                                                                                                                                                       Sd/-                                               

[RAJESH K. ARYA]

 MEMBER

GP