JUDGEMENT

(26.05.2023)

1. This complaint petition is filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 alleging deficiency in service rendered by the opposite parties thereby causing mental and physical harassment to the complainant.
2. The case of the complainant is that on 23.03.2022, he tried to book two air tickets in the name of Complainant &Complainant’s wife from Dibrugarh to New Delhi for 11.04.2022 on Vistara Airline and returnable ticket on 16.04.2022 on same Airline through the official web site of Make my Trip, i.e., Opposite party No.1
3. At time of final payment of Rs 24,398/- for the said journey, the said transaction was declined due to the wrong entry of CVV number of Complainant’s SBI Credit card and same was informed to complainant through email from Sbicard.com, Opposite Party no.2.
4. But complainant on going through his credit card statement found that an amount of Rs 24,398/- was debited by the Opposite party No.1 from his SBI credit card whereas the complainant has already received declined transaction from the Opposite party No.2, due to the wrong entry of CVV Number.
5. The opposite party No.1 without providing any services to the complainant illegally debited an amount of Rs 24,398/- from his SBI credit card, thereby caused deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.
6. The complainant’s prayer to direct the opposite parties as follows:-
   1. To refund the amount of Rs 24,398 with 18% interest/- till refund is done
   2. For deficiency of service Rs 1,00,000/-
   3. For mental and physical harassment Rs 50,000/-
   4. For Litigation Charge Rs 25000/-
   5. And other relief as the Hon’ble Commission deem fit & Proper.
7. On receipt of notice, the Opposite parties no.1, 2 & 3 appeared and contested the present consumer complaint by filing their respective written statement.
8. The opposite parties no.1, raised a preliminary objection with regard to the Territorial Jurisdiction of this Forum and denied of causing any deficiency of service to the complainant.
9. The opposite party No.1 contended that at time of making payment for booking the tickets, the complainant made two transaction on 23.03.2022; first at 7.48 AM & second at 7.51 AM, out of which second transaction was made at 7.51 AM was successful, on the basis of which opposite party no. 1 issued the tickets and booking confirmation to the complainant and further contented that no additional amount was debited from his account for failed transaction by the opposite party no.1
10. The opposite party no.1 on 23.03.2022 sent the ticket and confirmation as well as the tax invoice for the ticket on 26.03.2022 and web check information on 09.04.2022, 10.04.2022 for the flight scheduled on 11.04.2022 and for the flight scheduled on 17.04.2022 through web check notification dated 15.04.2022 & 16.04.2022, the same was conveyed through sms & email to the complainant. All the necessary information was sent to the complainant as per the standard norms but failed to receive any response from him.
11. The opposite party no.1 contented in its reply that opposite party no.1 dutifully executed its role from booking the ticket and sending confirmation to the complainant hence, the opposite party no.1 is not liable for any cost or compensation to the complainant.
12. In reply, opposite parties no. 2 & 3 filed their reply along with documents and contented that in the month of February 2020 complainant applied for credit card bearing account no. 0004335876442868544 by filing a credit card application. Copy of credit card application form documents annexed as Annexure-2.
13. The Opposite parties no.2 & 3 contented that on 23.03.2022 complainant inserted wrong CVV number for which transaction was declined and opposite parties mailed to the complainant stating about the decline of the transaction of Rs. 24,398/- at 7.49 AM. The complainant again attempted and the same which was successful at 7.51AM as the complainant has provided its detail correctly.
14. The opposite parties contented that complainant lodged an internal complaint before them for which charge back was raised and investigation was carried out during the post investigation, the opposite parties received the valid documents from the opposite party no.1 in support of their claim and as such opposite parties will not be able to take up the matters and same was communicated to the complainant on 27.04.2022. A copy of documents annexed as Annexure-3(colly)
15. The opposite parties denied of any cause of action against them and further contended that complaint is baseless. Hence, liable to be dismissed.
16. The respective counsels filed their written argument. We have heard their oral submission and have perused the records of the case.
17. Now, the points that arise for consideration in this case are:
    1. Whether this Commission is having Territorial Jurisdiction to entertain this complaint?
    2. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties for illegally debiting the amount of Rs 24,398/from complainant’s SBI credit card on 23.03.2022 ?
    3. Whether the complainant is entitled for the claim as prayed for, if so to what relief?
18. Point No.(i): In the present case, opposite party no.1 in their preliminary objection raised that as per the terms and conditions of jurisdiction clause of the User Agreement, only the courts of NCR Delhi have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the dispute, if any arising out of booking. In regard to this, Section 34 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 which talk about the territorial jurisdiction of District Commission and lays down that a consumer shall file a complaint at the place where all or one of the opposite parties reside or carries on business, or has a branch office or personally works for gains or talk about the cause of action, wholly or in part arises or the complainant resides or personally works for gain. In present case, complainant reside at P Sector Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh and have the right to file before this Commission where the cause of action arises as per the section envisaged under 34 of consumer protection Act 2019. Admittedly in this case complainant’s amount Rs 24,398/- was debited from his SBI credit card while processing at time of making payment online to Opposite Party No.1. As such, this commission is having jurisdiction to entertain the present case irrespective of jurisdiction mentioned in the User agreement.
19.  Point No. ii &iii: The complainant on 23.03.2022 tried to book two air tickets in the name of Complainant & his wife through the official web site of Make my Trip, Opposite party No.1 from Dibrugarh to New Delhi on 11.04.2022 and returnable ticket on 16.04.2022 both via Vistara Airline. While making payment of Rs 24,398/- for the said journey, the said transaction was declined due to the wrong entry of CVV No. of Complainant’s SBI Credit card and the same was informed to complainant through email by Sbicard.com, Opposite Party no.2. However, complainant on checking his credit card statement an amount of Rs 24,398/- was illegally debited from his SBI credit card without providing any services, thereby caused deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. On the other side, both opposite parties contend that complainant made two transactions on 23.03.2022; first transaction of Rs 24,398/- at 7.49 AM was declined due to wrong entry of CVV number, which was informed to the complainant through email. The complainant again attempted and the same was successful at 7.51 AM as the complainant has provided required information correctly and on receiving an  amount of Rs 24,398/- the opposite party No.1 issued the tickets and booking confirmation to him  as well as the tax invoice for the ticket on 26.03.2022 and web check information on 09.04.2022, 10.04.2022 for the flight scheduled on 11.04.2022 and for the flight scheduled on 17.04.2022 through web check notification dated 15.04.2022 & 16.04.2022. And the same was conveyed through sms and email  account to him. All the necessary information was sent to the complainant as per the standard norms but opposite party no.1 failed to receive any response from the complainant.
20. Going through the documents which the opposite parties no.2 & 3 placed on records as Annexure -3 in their reply showing the details of booking, itinerary, payment as well as the email history being sent to the complainant, especially reflecting the date and time mentioned is on 23.03.2022. Therefore, basing on these documents we hold that opposite parties no.1, 2 & 3 caused no deficiency of service to the complainant.
21. Hence, this consumer case No. CDRC/PP-121/2022 stands dismissed and disposed on contest.
22. Judgment pronounced and signed on this 26^th day of May 2023 at Yupia.

(Miss Deepa Yoka)                                           (Mr. Tarh Loma)

              Member                                                           Member

(Mr. Gote Mega)

     President