Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/891/2019

Ms Sudesh Khan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Make my Trip - Opp.Party(s)

Jatinder Kumar Kamboj

02 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/891/2019
Date of Institution	:	03/08/2019
Date of Decision	:	2.12.2022

 

 

Ms. Sudesh Khan wife of Mohamad Ramjan r/o H. No. 137, Sector 16A, Chandigarh.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

The  Managing Director (Incharge), make my trip, Tower A, B & C, 18 and 19 floor, Epitome Building No.5, DLF Cyber City Phase-II, Gurugram 122002.

.  … Opposite Party

 

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER MEMBER

                        

ARGUED BY		Sh. Jatinder Kumar Kamboj Adv. for the complainant.
		Sh. Nitin Bhasin, Adv. for OP.

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1. Briefly stated the complainant alongwith her family members applied visa for Singapore on the mobile app of Opposite Party on 24.5.2019 and she was to travel to Singapore from 24.6.2019 to 28.6.2019. The payment was made to the Opposite Party from the account of her son Zahid Parvez. All the requisite documents and the details of the complainant filled in the form available on the app  of Opposite Party including copy of passport, copy of  flight and hotel tickets were also uploaded on the app of Opposite Party.  The complainant was allotted a booking i/d number NV20224559190 for herself and her spouse for Singapore visa vide Annexure C-2 dated 24.5.2019.Thereafter the Opposite Party vide Annexure C-3 asked the complainant to send requisite documents including original passport  of the complainant and her husband. Accordingly the complainant submitted all the required documents by hand to the Opposite Party on 28.5.2019 and the complainant received confirmatory email Annexure C-4 dated 30.5.2019. The Visa of the complainant was approved and intimated vide email Annexure C-5.  The iternary and traveling details of the complainant and her family have been given in the para No. 11&12 of the complaint. The complainant travelled from Jaipur to Kulalmur as per the iternary alongwith her family members on 17.6.2019 and further travelled Langkawi, Malaysia on  22.6.2019 alongwith her family members. It is  pleaded on 24.6.2019 when the complainant alongwith her family reached Langkawi Airport for their outbound flight i.e. Air Asia to Singapore she was declined by the Air Lines to board on the flight on the ground of mis-match in the date of birth on the Singapore Visa and date birth  in the Passport of the complainant. In the Singapore visa the date of birth was mentioned as 23.2.1966 whereas in the passport it is mentioned as 22.2.1966.    It is alleged that due to the mistake of the Opposite Party the complainant alongwith her family stranded at the Air Port and had to travel back to India instantly alongwith her husband by a Delhi bound flight and the other family members of the complainant i.e her son , daughter in law and grandson had to travel from Kulalmpur to Singapore. It is alleged that due to mistake of Opposite Party the complainant and her family has to changes internary as mentioned in para No.19 which caused not only harassment but financial loss also. The complainant sent legal notice Annexure C-6 to the Opposite Party for compensation but to no avail. Hence, this complaint has been filed.
2.      In its written statement the OP No.1 while admitting the factual matrix of the case stated that the complainant herself admitted that she has filled up the form which was available on the mobile app of the answering Opposite Party and thereafter uploaded the documents and the said information was sent to the embassy by the answering Opposite Party for approval.  It is averred that it is the duty of the complainant to fill the correct information in the form before sending the same for approval to the embassy and the entire process is automated and has no human intervention. The server on the basis of information provided by the complainant applies for VISA.  It is stated that the answering Opposite Party issued the confirmed VISA approval to the complainant for which the complainant availed the service of answering Opposite Party. However, the complainant due to her own mistake has mentioned incorrect date of birth at the time of filling of VISA application form due to which she was denied check-in at the Langkawi Airport. It is the duty of the complainant to verify the details before travelling and after issuance of VISA. Thus, the Opposite Party is not liable for the mistake of the complainant. Denying all other allegations leveled in the complaint it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
3. Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
4. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
6.  A perusal of Annexure C-2 the email sent by the Opposite Party to the complainant under the head important information reveals as below:-

“1. The ultimate decision to approve/reject lies with the Immigration Centre. MakeMy trip is acting merely as a facilitator and has no jurisdiction with regard to visa being granted or reject.

2.   Please note that your visa will be applied basis the details given by your  in the online form. In case there is any error Makemy Trip will not bear any liability.”  

 

     Further perusal of para No.4 of Annexure C-3 the email sent by Opposite Party to the complainant reveals as under:-

“4. 1Visa application form per person, duly filled and signed by passengers (please note if you are using blue pen in form so please do not use black pen on that form)(s)”

 

      From the afore-extracts, it is quite apparent that it is the complainant himself who has filled the required information in the prescribed form and sent to Opposite Party for processing VISA from the embassy concerned. It is also clear from the above that the VISA was to be processed on the basis of the details given by the complainant. It is the admitted case of the complainant that she filled the details online at her level.

     Furthermore the agreement between user and make my trip placed on record as Annexure R-1  at page 26 and  27 of the agreement  under the head responsibility of the users, it is mentioned as under:-

“Once MMT returns passport and documents of a user to him/her, it is their responsibility to check that all requisite visas have been obtained and details mentioned therein are correct and matches to their travel itinerary. User shall also check his/her personal details mentioned on the visa issued.”

7. It is very clear from the aforesaid clause of agreement that after receipt of visa the user/complainant herself was required to check all requisite details herself.  Hence, it is well proved that it was the duty of the complainant to check all her details after receipt of visa but in the instant case the complainant tried to put all her act of omissions on the Opposite Party, which is totally baseless. Hence, the complaint has no merit and no case is made out against the Opposite Party.
8.   In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
9.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned

			Sd/-
			[Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			Sd/- [Surjeet Kaur] Member Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
mp			Member