DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II U.T. CHANDIGARH Complaint Case No.: 1285 of 2009 Date of Inst: 07.09.2009 Date of Decision:23.09.2010 Smt.Pritam kaur w/o S.Gurmukh Singh aged about 75 years r/o Village Sidhupur Kalan, Tehsil Khamano, District Fatehgarh Sahib, Panjab. ---Complainant V E R S U S 1. Lufthansa Airlines through its Authorized Representative, Terminal 2, IGI Airport, New Delhi-110037. 2. Mr.Vijay (Branch Head), UAE Exchange and Financial Services Ltd., Ground Floor, SCO 28-29-30, Sector 9-D, Chandigarh. 3. Mr.Gaurav Kumar (Prop.) Star Immigration Consultants, Near Oriental Bank of Commerce, Opposite Bus Stand, Morinda, Punjab. ---Opposite Parties QUORUM SHRI LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT SHRI ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI MEMBER SMT.MADHU MUTNEJA MEMBER PRESENT: Sh.Shabir Singh, Adv. for complainant Sh.Sandeep Suri, Adv. for OP No.1 Sh.Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate proxy counsel for Sh.Subhash Sharma, Advocate for the OP-2. OP-3 already exparte. --- PER LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT Smt.Pritam Kaur has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying therein that OP be directed to :- i) pay a sum of Rs.13,900/- charged by OP-1 as extension charges along with interest. ii) Pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment. iii) Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses. 2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that she intended to visit her son at Italy. So she approached Op-3 who arranged return ticket for her for a sum of Rs.39,505/- vide receipt (Annexure C-1). The said return ticket was confirmed for 24.12.2008. Due to some personal reasons, the complainant was not able to undertake her journey on 24.12.2008. Therefore, she approached UAE Exchange and Financial Services Ltd. (OP-2). The officials of the company asked the complainant to deposit a sum of Rs.12010/- as re-booking charges. Finding no other alternative, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.12,010/- with OP-2 on 18.12.2008. According to the complainant, the officials of OP-2 did not issue any receipt regarding payment of Rs.12010/- till 21.01.2009. It has further been pleaded that after payment of Rs.12010/- another return ticket was issued to her for her journey on 04.01.2009. On 04.01.2009, she reached Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi at 9.50 a.m. Her departure card was also prepared on the same day. According to the complainant, to her dismay, when she was ready to board the flight, the employees of OP-1 stopped her from boarding the flight on the ground that she had not paid the extension charges. The complainant tried to convince them that she had already paid a sum of Rs.12010/- as extension charges. However, the employees of OP-1 did not allow her to board the flight. So, the complainant was forced to pay 200 Euro (Rs.13,950/-) as extension charges at the counter. In the meantime, the flight took off. The complainant was issued a new ticket for her journey on 05.01.2009. According to the complainant, she had to stay whole of the night at Delhi. She had to hire accommodation at exorbitant rates and had to pay taxi charges. She also suffered mental agony and physical harassment because she was not allowed to undertake journey on 04.01.2010 for which confirmed ticket had already been issued to her. In these circumstances, according to the complainant, the act of OPs of not allowing her to undertake journey despite confirmed ticket, amounts to deficiency in service. In these circumstances, the present complaint was filed seeking the reliefs mentioned above. 3. In the reply filed by the OP-1, it has been denied that the ticket was booked for an amount of Rs.39,505/- or the complainant paid Rs.12010/- on account of extension charges or the receipt was issued on 21.01.2009. It has been pleaded by OP-1 that the receipt (Annexure C-1) pertains to some purported flight on Austrian Airlines. The ticket booked in question was U Class ticket instead of C Class Ticket as is evident from Annexure C-2. According to OP-1, the complainant for the first time approached Akbar Travels Of India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi for rebooking on 23.12.2008 for which the rebooking charges were paid only on 05.01.2009. It has been pleaded that as per rules, OP refused to permit the complainant to travel on 04.01.2009 as she failed to pay the rebooking charges before the scheduled date of departure. Immediately on receipt of the rebooking chares, OP-1 facilitated the travel of the complainant on the immediate next available flight. According to OP-1, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint qua it deserves dismissal. 4. In the reply filed by the OP-2, it has been admitted that the OP-2 had arranged a return ticket for the complainant from the authorized IATA Agent i.e. Akbar Travels of India Ltd., Ist Floor, Midas Corporate Park, 37, G.T.Road, Jalandhar, Punjab and the journey was to be undertaken on 24.12.2008. OP-2 has also admitted that the complainant paid to it Rs.12,010/- as extension charges. The other facts pleading in the complaint have been admitted. According to OP-2, there is no deficiency in service on its part and the complaint qua it deserves dismissal. 5. OP-3 was duly served through registered A.D. but nobody appeared on its behalf either in person or through counsel. Therefore, OP-3 was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.10.2009. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including documents, annexures, affidavits etc. 7. The case of the complainant is that she had paid a sum of Rs.12010/- to OP-2 as rebooking charges for the extended date of journey. Despite it, employees ofOP-1 did not allow her to board the flight on 04.01.2009. It has further been argued that the complainant was having a confirmed ticket for her journey to Italy. So the employees of OP-1 had no right to stop her from boarding the flight. Payment of Rs.12010/- as rebooking charges has been admitted by OP-2. However, there is no material on record to prove that the said amount of Rs.12,010/- was credited in the account of OP-1.On the other hand, the case of OP-1 is that it had not received the re-booking charges. So it had a right to stop the complainant from boarding the flight. It has further been argued that as soon as the re-booking chares were paid fresh ticket was issued to the complainant and her journey was facilitated. The next day receipt regarding payment of Rs.12010/- is dated 05.01.2009 i.e. the day after, the complainant had to undertake the journey originally. This fact corroborates the stand ofOP-1 to the effect that it had not received the re-booking charges as on 04.01.2009. In such circumstances, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1. So the complaint qua OP-1 stands dismissed. 8. As far as OP-3 is concerned. He was approached for a return ticket. He arranged the same. There is no allegation that the said tickets were not valid. So there is no deficiency in service on his part. So the compliant qua OP-3 is also dismissed. 9. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.12010/- for rebooking of his ticket to OP-2 on 18.12.2008. This fact has been admitted by OP-2. Despite having received the amount, OP-2 did not deposit the same in the account of OP-1 as a result of which, the complainant had to pay the re-booking charges of Rs.13,950/- again and she had to suffer mental agony and harassment. So there is deficiency in service on the part of OP-2. 10. In view of the above findings, this complaint is allowed with a direction to OP-2 to refund a sum of Rs.12,010/- to the complainant. OP-2 is also directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment besides Rs.5000/- as costs of litigation. 11. This order be complied with by the OP No.2 within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the OP No.2 shall be liable to refund amount of Rs.22,010/- (Rs.12010/- + Rs.10,000/-) to the complainant along with penal interest @ 18 % p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 07.09.2009 till its realization besides costs of litigation. 12. Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room. Announced sd/- 23.09.2010 (LAKSHMAN SHARMA) PRESIDENT cm sd/- (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI) MEMBER Sd/- (MADHU MUTNEJA) MEMBER
| | MR. A.R BHANDARI, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. LAKSHMAN SHARMA, PRESIDENT | MRS. MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER | | 
