Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/197/2020

Dr. Ranbir Chander Sobti - Complainant(s)

Versus

Make My Trip - Opp.Party(s)

Ajay Sood

10 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	197/2020
Date of Institution	:	18.03.2020
Date of Decision	:	10.05.2023

 

                   

           

 

Dr.Ranbir Chander Sobti s/o Late Sh.Sai Dass Sobti aged 71 years r/o House No.2917, Sector 42-C, Chandigarh

                ...  Complainant.

Versus

1.  Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd., Head Office DLF Building No.5, Tower B, Gurgaon. (Haryana) PIN-122010.

2nd Address:-

Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd., SCO No, 169-170, 1st Floor, Madhya Marg, Near Sindhi Sweets, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh-160018.

3rd Address:-

Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd., 124, Ist Floor, Ring Road Mall, Sector 3, Near Deepali Chowk, Rohini, Delhi-110085.

 

2.  Swiss Airlines, Urmi Estate, 10^th Floor, 95, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel West, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400013 through its Branch Manager.

…. Opposite Parties

BEFORE:
	SHRI AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU,	PRESIDENT
	SHRI S.K.SARDANA	MEMBER
Present:-
	Sh.Ajay Sood, Counsel of complainant Ms.Kusum Kaushik, Adv. Proxy for Sh.Gaurav Rana, Counsel of OP No.1 Sh.Kartik, Advocate Proxy for Sh.Tushar Arora, Counsel of OP No.2.

 

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A.(Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

1.     The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, as amended up-to-date alleging therein that he is a senior citizen,  retired as Vice Chancellor of Punjab University, Chandigarh and a reputed person. OP No.1 provides travel services i.e. booking of airline tickets of different airlines, hotel bookings, railway ticket bookings and Bus ticket bookings to the journal public under the name and style of Make My Trip against the valid consideration. The complainant plan to visit Zurich (Switcher Land). On 08-10-2019, he approached OP No.1  online to purchase the return air ticket from OP No.2 from Delhi to Zurich (24-12-2019) and Zurich to Delhi, India (01-01-2020). The complainant provided all the information alongwith passport particulars as asked by OP No.1 and paid Rs.98,306 through his debit card at Chandigarh. OP No.1 sent the booking confirmation of the above said tickets through email. On receiving the same, the complainant found that his name was wrongly mentioned as “Sobti Sobti” instead of “Ranbir Chander Sobti” on the printouts of email tickets. The complainant immediately contacted OP No.1 and informed about the discrepancy in the tickets and requested for its correction. OP No.1 through email dated 11-10-2019 informed that they had sent the details to OP No.2 for the amendment in the name of the complainant and further advised to wait for 24-48 working hours. The complainant regularly contacted the OPs for the correction of his name but OP No.1 through email dated 15.10.2019 informed that as per the Airlines Policy name correction is not permitted and the case was closed from their end. The complainant requested OP No.1 for cancellation of his ticket as he is not competent to visit on the ticket issued in the wrong name and requested for refund of amount paid to the OPs but they did not get the ticket cancelled. Left with no other option, the complainant bought another air ticket for himself from OP No.2 for Rs.49,605/- for the same date as his wife was travelling on the same flight on the same date. The complainant served legal notice dated 28.01.2022 through registered post upon the OPs but OP No.2 did not reply and OP No.1 vide its reply dated 12.02.2020 denied its liability on false and baseless grounds. The complainant filed the present complaint against the OPs seeking refund of the air ticket,  compensation for not providing the proper services as they are not only deficient in rendering services but also guilty of indulgence into unfair trade practice.
2.     After the service of notice upon the OPs, the OPs filed their separate written versions to the complaint taking preliminary objections that the complainant has not approached this Commission with bona fide intentions; the complaint is frivolous and misconceived; the complainant has not approached this Commission with clean hands and as such guilty of suppressio veri and suggestion falsi. On merits, the OPs denied all the allegations made in the complaint against them and lastly the OPs have prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with costs.
3.     Parties filed their respective affidavits and documents in support of their case.
4.     We have heard the Counsel for the contesting parties and have gone through the documents on record.
5.     The main issue involved in the present complaint is whether there is any deficiency in providing services to the complainant by the OPs or not?
6.     In order to find out answer to the above mentioned question, the following facts and circumstances are necessary to be discussed.
7.     In order to facilitate with the filling of the details for the flight tickets, the website and the Mobile Application of OP No.1, clearly states that the names of the concerned passengers should only be submitted as per names provided in their respective passports. The important caution has also been provided which reads as under:-

"IMPORTANT: Enter your name as it is mentioned on your passport."

 

        Further, being a technology-driven company, OP No.1, at the time of making of the concerned booking, provides on the Website and the Mobile Application, the options to put in the First, Middle and Last name in distinguished, designated dialogue boxes for the complainant to put in the details. The same is forwarded to the concerned Airline. Hence, there is no human interference in the said process and hence, the name of the complainant, as put in by the complainant is forwarded to the concerned airline.

8.     In the present case, the complainant entered 'Sobti' in the dialogue box of the First Name was provided in the Website and consequently, the complete name which was forwarded to the OP No.2 was "Sobti Sobti". Hence, it has been established that the concerned name was wrongly entered by the complainant himself, which was different from his name as represented in his concerned Passport. Hence, OP No.1 cannot be made liable for the mistake/error on the part of the complainant himself.
9.     Further, as per the office of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (hereinafter to be referred as "DGCA), issued guidelines dated 01.08.2016 (Annexure R-3), whereby it is mentioned that the Airlines shall provide & Lock in option for 24 hours (from the time of booking of the concerned fight ticket) during which passenger, can cancel or amend the ticket with any additional charges, except for the normal prevailing fare for the revised flight for which the ticket is sought to be amended. In the present case, the complainant made the booking on 09.10.2019 at 11:52 AM. Hence, in accordance with the Guidelines dated 01.08.2016, issued by the DGCA, the name on the concerned flight ticket could only be amended till 10.10.2019 at 11:52 AM. However, the Complainant raised the request for the First-Name change on 09.10.2019 at 12:41 PM, wherein he was apprised to provide a copy of his passport so that the same can be forwarded to the concerned Airline, and the concerned Frist-Name change could take effect. However, despite being told to send a copy of the concerned passport on 09.10.2019 at around 12:45 P.M., the complainant miserably failed to furnish the same within the prescribed timeline of 24 Hours, despite several reminders and follow ups. At this stage, OP, being a consumer-centric Company, while making an exception for the complainant, approached him on 10.10.2019 at 01:20 PM, even after the prescribed timeline of 24 hours to furnish the copy of the Passport, however, the complainant miserably failed to do the same. Therefore, due to the omission on the part of the complainant, the concerned First Name change could not take effect in accordance with the Guidelines dated 01.08.2016 as issued by the DGCA. Hence, it is the complainant who himself entered 'Sobti' in the dialogue box of the first name was provided in the Website and consequently, the complete name which was forwarded to the OP No.2 was "Sobti Sobti", Thus, the complainant cannot be allowed to take benefits if his own wrongs. Hence, the complaint is bereft of any merit and the same deserves to be dismissed.
10.     In view of the above discussion, the present complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs.
11.     The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
12.     Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Commission 10/05/2023                                  sd/-
	(AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU) PRESIDENT
	Sd/-
	(S.K.SARDANA) MEMBER