Complainant Gulsheen Singh Bawa through the present complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, ‘the Act’) has prayed that the necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite party to deliver the remaining amount of Rs.2456/- along with interest. He has also claimed Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him including Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.
- The case of the complainant in brief is that on 24.6.2015 at 5.44 P.M. he booked multiple air line ticket from Delhi to Thiruvanathapuram and paid Rs.7234/- as the charges for this ticket and after that complainant cancelled the same on 24.8.2015 due to some personal reason and he was promised to be paid Rs.4912/- as refund after cancellation/deduction. It was pleaded that complainant only received Rs.2456/- in his account and even after sharing bank statement for numerous number of times and calling and writing E-mails to their customers support many times the amount has yet not been received by the complainant and as such complainant suffered harassment again and again from the opposite party. It was further pleaded that due this illegal act of the opposite party complainant suffered harassment and mental agony which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, hence this complaint.
- Notice of the complaint was served upon the opposite party who appeared through their counsel and filed the written reply by taking the preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable; this Forum has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint; complainant has filed the false, frivolous and vexatious complaint and complainant has suffered loss due to act of the opposite party. On merits, it was denied that complainant has suffered loss as refund amount had not been received by him. Opposite party processed the refund to the complainant but inadvertently complainant did not receive the same as part amount which was unintentional act on the part of the opposite party. It was further stated that opposite party gave the assurance and processed the refund accordingly but this can be a technical error which cannot be leveled against the opposite party. It was also stated that later on opposite party tried to refund the remaining amount but the complainant refused to receive the same.
4. Complainant had tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C1 along with document Ex.C2 to Ex.C15 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.
5. Counsel for the opposite party had tendered into evidence affidavit of Saurabh Taneja Deputy Manager Ex.OP-1 and affidavit of Ankita Mishra Asstt. Manager (Legal) Ex.OP-2 and closed the evidence on behalf of opposite party.
6. We have duly heard the learned counsels for the two sides on the points of law pertaining to the present complaint and have also carefully examined its contents along with the statutory merit of the supporting evidence/document(s) in order to determine its adjudicatory finality under the applicable CP Act’1986.
7. However, during the course of arguments on 11.04.2015 the counsel for the opposite party offered to pay a lump sum amount of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant in full and final settlement of the matter pertaining to the present complaint. He has also suffered a statement before the forum (on behalf of his client) to the above effect. The proceedings were adjourned to provide incubation to the settlement proposal.
8. Presently, we did focus on the amicable settlement of the dispute pertaining to one petty ‘basic’ amount of Rs.2,456/- only by temporarily setting aside the merits/demerits of the matter in issue and have found the payment proposal of lump sum amount of Rs.5,000/- to be definitely more ‘attractive’ and beneficial to all the parties. Firstly, it shall amount to a ‘win-win’ situation to all and secondly there shall not be any left out bitter taste as in case of an adjudicatory.
9. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that without going into the merits/demerits of the present complaint, it shall be best disposed of by allowing the present litigants to implement the settlement proposal of 11.04.2015 with the opposite party service providers paying Rs.5,000/- to the complainant within 15 days of the receipt of the copy of the present orders. No order as to cost.
10. Copy of the orders be communicated to both the parties as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act’ 1986 and after compliance file be consigned to records.
(Naveen Puri)
President.
ANNOUNCED: (Jagdeep Kaur)
MAY 06, 2016 Member.
*YP*
