Delhi

North East

CC/22/2021

Har Mohan Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

11 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 22/21

 

 

In the matter of:

 

	Sh. Har Mohan Singh S/o Sh. Washdev Singh R/o B-21/F-I, Dilshad Garden, Delhi	Complainant
	Versus
1.               2.           3.	Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd. DLF Building No.5, Tower-B, DLF Cybre City, DLF Phase 2, Sector 25, Gurugram, Haryana, India-122002 Registered Address:- B-36, First Floor, Pusha Road, New Delhi -05   Sh. Deep  Kalra C.E.O, Founder and Executive Chairman, Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd. DLF Building No.5, Tower - B, DLF Cybre City, DLF Phase 2, Sector-25, Gurugram, Haryana India -122002   Korean Airlines Co. Ltd. Through its concerned officer Shop No. 54, Sector-3, Block-D, Dir Area, Gole Market, New Delhi-01	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:        JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:                           DATE OF ORDER:

09.02.21 14.03.23 11.05.23

 

 

 

 

 

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

ORDER

 Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer protection Act, 2019.

Case of the Complainant

1. The facts of the case are that the Complainant booked a confirmed return ticket for travelling from Delhi to LAX (USA) on 02.03.20 vide booking ID No. NN 2911652538796 Vide e-ticket no. 180-3319184863 of Opposite Party No.3. He had to return back from USA to Delhi on 26.05.20. On 02.03.20 the Complainant went to LAX (USA) by the airline of Opposite Party No.3.  On 26.05.20 the Opposite Party No.3 cancelled the flight and no intimation was given to him in this regard. On 26.05.20 Indian government pleased to open lockdown and Opposite Party No.1 to 3 did not inform the Complainant. The Complainant stated that due to cancellation of flight by Opposite Party No.3 Complainant had to stay abroad for excess period of 27 days i.e. from 26.05.20 to 22.06.20. On 21.06.20 Complainant booked another flight ticket to come back to India. The Complainant stated that he contacted Opposite Parties time to time and negotiated through email and calls and all the Opposite Parties assured the Complainant to return his confirmed air ticket amount and on 01.11.20 all the Opposite Parties refused to pay the amount to Complainant. The Complainant stated that on 19.12.20 Complainant sent demand notice to Opposite Parties and in spite of service of demand notice Opposite Parties failed to make the payment to Complainant. Hence, this shows deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties. Complainant has prayed for Rs. 3,89,654 (in total), 58,006/-and Rs. 1,46,000/- as compensation.  

Case of the Opposite Party No.1 and 2

2. The Opposite Party No.1 and 2 contested the case and filed common written statement. It is alleged that the Complainant has filed the complaint with malafide intention. It is stated that Opposite Party No.2 is not a necessary party as per the settled law. It is stated that the Opposite Party is only facilitator for booking the air tickets. It is admitted that the Complainant has booked tickets through it. It is stated that an amount of Rs. 27,275/- has been refunded to the Complainant. It is stated that an amount of Rs. 29,777/- pertaining to utilised flight ticket amount was not refunded and convenience fees of Rs. 399/- was also not refunded as the same was Not Refundable Amount. It is stated that the Complainant has agreed to the user agreement and cancellation policy of the Opposite Party.  At the time of booking the tickets, the Complainant has accepted the terms and conditions of the user agreement and he also consented to the cancellation policy of the Opposite Party as well as the concerned airlines. It is also alleged that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction. It has prayed for the dismissal for the complaint.

Rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party No.1 and 2

3. The Complainant filed rejoinder to the written statement of Opposite Party No.1 and 2 wherein the Complainant has denied the pleas raised by the Opposite Parties and has reiterated the assertion made in the complaint. It is admitted by the Complainant in his rejoinder that he has received Rs. 27,275/- after he gave notice dated 19.12.2020. The Complainant has also denied the user agreement.

Evidence of the Complainant

4. The Complainant in support of his complaint filed his affidavit wherein the Complainant supported his case as mentioned in the complaint. Complainant has also filed an affidavit of Sh. Amarjeet Singh.

Evidence of the Opposite Party No.1 and 2

5. In order to prove its case Opposite Party No.1 and 2 has filed affidavit of Sh. S. Sreesh, Assistant Manager and Authorised Representative of Opposite Party No.1 and 2, wherein the averments made in the written statement of Opposite Party No.1 and 2 have been supported.

Arguments & Conclusion

6. We have heard the Ld. Counsels for the Complainant and Opposite Parties. We have also perused the file and the written arguments filed by the Complainant and Opposite Parties. The case of the Complainant is that he had booked air tickets of Korean Airlines (Opposite Party No.3) for performing journey from Delhi to USA on 02.03.20. And the Complainant performed the said journey to Delhi to USA on 02.03.20. The Complainant had to return from USA to Delhi on 26.05.20. The case of the Complainant is that the flight was cancelled by Korean Airlines and he had to return India after purchasing another air ticket of Indian Airlines which was being run under the Indian 
   Government Scheme of Vande Bharat Mission.  The case of the Opposite Parties is that on the date of journey i.e. on 26.05.20 for which the Complainant had purchased ticket from USA to Delhi was cancelled due to Covid pandemic. It is also the case of the Opposite Party as per the agreement the Complainant was refund Rs. 27,275/-.
7. It is an admitted fact that due to Covid pandemic international flights were cancelled thus the Korean Airlines had to cancel its flight by which the Complainant was to perform journey from USA to India on 26.05.20. It also a known fact that under the Vande Bharat Scheme of the government of India only the Indian government flights were allowed.
8. In the present case, the Complainant has booked his ticket prior to the lockdown and thus his case is not covered under the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment of Pravasi Legal Cell and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. reported in Manu/SC/0732/2020. Therefore, the process of refund has to be done as per the Civil Aviation Requirements issued by the DGCA dated 22.05.08. As per the said guidelines, the Complainant has been paid Rs. 27,275/- after deducting the non-refundable amount from the price paid by the Complainant for return ticket. It is also to be noted that the flight was cancelled by the Korean Airlines as the same was not permissible on account of Covid pandemic therefore we do not see any deficiency on the part of airlines. The Complainant has prayed for compensation on account of excess stay due to cancellation of flight. The Complainant has not led any evidence in order to show that as to how he is entitled for such a huge amount of compensation.
9. In view of the above discussion, we do not see any merit in the complaint and the same is dismissed.  
10. Order announced on 11.05.23.

Copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(Anil Kumar Bamba)        Member

(Surinder Kumar Sharma) President