Smt. Sangita Paul, Member
This is a case filed by Shri Kousik Sarkar, S/o. Jawahar Lal Sarkar of House No.276, Ramkrishna Mission Pally, “Ramgan Bhavan” 3rd Floor, opposite Sarada Vidyapith High School against Make My Trip and Air India Limited with a prayer for a direction upon the OP to look into the matter with fore most importance to take necessary steps to render proper service to the complainant and provide the amount of Rs.55,000/- along with interest on the said amount which had already been paid to the OP Company, to provide Rs.45,000/- as compensation for the unfathomable mental harassment and agony suffered by the mother and child as well as to the complainant, due to deficiency in service which resulted in further loss and expenditure to the complainant’s sister in lieu of the expenses on return journey and hotel charges to direct the OP to pay costs of litigation.
The OP No.1 is Make My Trip. The address is 19th Floor, Tower A, B & C Epitome, Building No.5 DLF Phase 2, Sector 24, Gurugram, Haryana-122 002.
The OP No.2 is Air India Limited. Air India is represented by General Manager (Personnel). The address is Airlines House 1133, Gurudwara Rakabganj Road, New Delhi – 110 001.
The complainant, by filing this case states that the complainant’s sister Sanchita Sarkar and her 4-year old daughter Leiana Dewanji were scheduled to fly from Amsterdam to Kolkata on 15th of March, 2020 with halts in Frankfurt and Mumbai.
After the complainant’s sister and her 4-year old daughter Leiana Dewanji landed on Frankfurt for boarding the above mentioned scheduled flight and when they were about to board their connecting flight to Mumbai, the Manager of Air India prevented them from getting on the airline citing the cause of concern and that they can allow Sanchita but cannot allow Leiana who is the daughter of Sanchita Sarkar and the complainant’s niece, as she is an OCI. It was mentioned that his niece is a Dutch citizen. The complainant’s sister was harassed because of the inconsiderate behaviour of OP No.2. The complainant’s sister and niece arranged their accommodation on their own and had to travel back their home at their own expense. The complainant’s sister could not come to Kolkata, but she failed to get the money back. The OP did not refund the money. The OP is running an unfair Trade Practice.
That the cause of action arose on 07.04.2021.
Hence the complainant prays for directing the OPs to look into this matter with foremost importance to take necessary steps to render proper service to the complainant and to refund the amount of Rs.55,000/- along with interest of the said amount, which had already been paid to the OP, to pay Rs.45,000/- as compensation for the unfathomable mental harassment and agony suffered by the mother and the child as well as the complainant due to deficiency in service and to pay litigation cost.
The OP No.1 states that the complainant did not come to the court with clean hands. The complaint is frivolous, misconceived and mala fide. The complainant has twisted and suppressed the material facts.
The OP acts as a mere facilitator for booking the confirmed air tickets on behalf of the customers with concerned service providers upon receiving the confirmation from the concerned service providers, booking ID is generated and ticket is shared.
Any person intending to purchase any product or avail the services of the OP is bound to adhere by the terms and conditions of the user Agreement. For availing of the services of the OP, the intended traveler has to enter into an E-contract with the OP by consenting to the terms and conditions of the OP by clicking to “I agree” pop up or button. Hence the customers are bound by the terms and conditions of the user Agreement. The date of travelling was 15.03.2020. OP No.1 states that once the bookings are confirmed by the concerned service providers, the same is shared with the intended traveler. Thus the answering OP is discharged from his obligations and duties. The Op gives all the details. The relationship shared between the answering OP and the concerned service provider is on a principal to principal basis.
The intended traveler after going through the details mentioned in the web portal requests for booking of the hotel, airlines, bus services with the OP. The daughter of the complainant’s sister was denied to both the flight due to consolidated travel advisory for novel corona virus (Covid-19). Because VISA free travel granted to OCI holders was kept in abeyance till April 15, 2020 w.e.f. March 13, 2020.
The complainant was miserably failed to disclose any cause of action against the OP.
The OP provides confirmed booking to its customers. The OP shall not be liable on account of deficiency in service provided by the Airlines. Hence, no cause of action has arisen against the OP. So, the instant complaint is liable to be dismissed.
The complainant miserably failed to make out any case against the OP for the alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
The correspondence which took place between the complainant and Air India Airlines is not within the knowledge of the OP. Hence, denied for want of knowledge. The Government guidelines during pandemic is known to the complainant.
The OP No.1 prays for dismissal of the case on the basis of preliminary submissions.
That the case was filed on 23.07.2021. The case was admitted on 10.08.2021. On 09.12.2021, the OP files W/V. On 23.02.2022 the complainant files evidence on affidavit. On 05.05.2022, the OP files a petition for adding Air India as necessary party. The prayer of the OP is allowed. On 03.01.2023, the complainant files questionnaire. On 07.07.2022, the OP No.2 appears. The complainant files reply. No step is taken by OP No.2. The case proceeds ex-parte against OP No.2. On 25.11.2022, OP No.1 files BNA. Heard Ld. Lawyer for the OP. On 21.02.2023, the complainant files BNA. Argument of both sides was heard. Accordingly, we proceeded for giving judgement.
Points for consideration :-
- Is the complainant, a consumer?
- Are the OPs guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
Point No.1:-
On perusal of documents and records, it appears that the complainant booked two air tickets one for her sister, another for her sister’s 4-year old daughter Leiana Dewanji from Make My Trip Pvt. Ltd. The complainant paid money for booking the air tickets. The complainant paid money to Make My Trip Pvt. Ltd. The complainant’s sister’s schedule of the journey was from Amsterdam to Kolkata. The OP provides travel related services. As the complainant paid money to the OP No.1, the complainant is a consumer u/s 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. So the first point is decided in favour of the complainant.
Point No:2 :
That the complainant bought two flight tickets with booking ID NN7910752629294. Adequate service has not given to the sister of the complainant. The complainant boarded the flight from Amsterdam. She landed at Frankfurt, Germany. She was about to aboard flight from Mumbai, but she was stopped at Frankfurt. Her daughter was not permitted to travel from Frankfurt. Op No.1 is the facilitator, but the complainant’s sister was deprived of getting any privilege from her. The complainant’s sister did not proceed further. The complainant’s sister along with her daughter had to go back to Amsterdam. They had to suffer mental anguish and trauma for no fault of their own. The complainant’s sister had to arrange for her lodging at Frankfurt, and she had to spend for her journey back to Eindhoven, Netherlands. It is the OP No.1’s responsibility to compensate for the loss, she had incurred for lodging at Frankfurt and fare to go back to Amsterdam. The OP No.1 acts as a facilitator. The complainant’s sister is deprived of getting any facility. The adequate service which the complainant is supposed to get, she did not get the same. The complainant’s sister sent a legal notice on 07.04.2021. Because the Air India personnel refused to let them pass, despite having a valid ticket, it is the duty of OP, to co-operate with the complainant. Nothing of that sort happened. It is due to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice of the OP, the complainant’s sister faced trouble. So the 2nd point is decided in favour of the complainant and against the OPs.
Point No.03 :-
The complainant’s sister fell victim in the hands of the OP. The complainant’s sister failed to get adequate service from the OP. The complainant’s sister had to go back to Amsterdam from Frankfurt, due to no fault of her own. The reason of the strange behavior of the OPs is best known to them. The complainant’s sister and her 4-year old daughter had to suffer a lot due to unnecessary halt at the Airport of Frankfurt. Then the complainant’s sister had to go back to Amsterdam. The complainant’s sister faced monetary loss. Hence, she is entitled to get relief as prayed for. Hence, the 3rd point is decided in favour of the complainant and against the OPs.
In the result, the complaint case succeeds.
Fees paid is correct.
Hence, it is,
ORDERED
That the complaint be and the same is hereby allowed with contest against OP No. 1 and ex-parte against OP No.2 with cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand).
That the OPs 1 and 2 jointly and/or severally are directed to pay Rs.55,000/- (Rupees Fifty Five Thousand) with 10% interest w.e.f. 07.04.2021 within 45 days from the date of this order.
That the OPs 1 and 2 jointly and/or severally are directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) to the complainant for mental pain, agony, harassment sustained by the complainant and deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps within 45 days from the date of this order.
That the litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) is to be paid by the OPs 1 and 2 jointly and/or severally within the stipulated period of 45 days.
That the complainant is at liberty to put the order into execution if the orders are not complied with within 45 days from the date of this order.
Ld. Member Sri Partha Kumar Basu joined on 11.04.2023 and he did not take part in hearing the argument of this case. As such, he did not sign the Judgement & Order passed on this day.
Let a copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned free of cost.
That the final order will be available in the following website: www.confonet.nic.in.
Dictated and corrected by me.
Sangita Paul
Member
