Order dictated by:

Ms.Rachna Arora, Member

1. Sandeep Singh complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  on the allegations that complainant through online system made the booking of Air ticket of Kualalampur to Hong Kong on 14.4.2016 and made payment of Rs. 18038/- from the credit card of the brother of the complainant  which was debited from the said account with the opposite party. The official of the opposite party intimated telephonically  to the complainant that the said booking was not confirmed . The complainant is regularly making futile communications with the opposite party for the refund of the said amount of Rs. 18038/- with the opposite party, but the opposite party dilly dallied the matter  on one pretext or the other and till date the opposite party has not refunded the said amount to the complainant. Earlier complainant filed the complaint against the opposite party before this Forum but the same was withdrawn as the same was not properly filed by the complainant  with the liberty to file the complaint afresh. The aforesaid act of the opposite party in not refunding the amount amounts to deficiency in service, unfair trade practices and is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Vide instant complaint, complainant has sought for the following reliefs:-

1. Opposite party  be directed to refund Rs. 18038/- alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. from 14.4.2016 till realization ;
2. Compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- alongwith adequate litigation expenses may also be awarded to the complainant.

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that on April 14,2016 at 16:41:41 complainant visited the website of the opposite party and desired to make a booking of air ticket for Kualalumpur to Phuket Sector. It is pertinent to mention that in the process for generating confirmed booking a booking id was given as NN7304112786923. However, the complainant’s booking was not generated successfully as the payment of Rs.16012/- was not received at the end of the opposite party. The snapshot of the pending payment of Rs. 16012/- is annexed herewith. It is pertinent to note that the complainant on April 14,2016 at 17:02:11 again initiated to generate the booking and the opposite party confirmed booking for the same sector as a sum of Rs. 18038/- was credited to the account of the opposite party. Thus a confirmation  SMS was sent to that effect on Mobile No. 8146525299  . As such the opposite party has discharged its limited liability by making the confirmed booking for the complainant as desired by him. The details of the booking in question is as under:-

3.       The opposite party being a booking agent had issued the confirmed air ticket for Kuala Lumpur to Phuket for complainant being a booking agent discharged its duty. The complainant’s first booking could not be confirmed for an amount of Rs. 16012/- was not completed as the payment was not received by the opposite party, the complainant will have to check regarding the same with the concerned bank i.e. ICICI Bank. It was further submitted that the complainant is seeking for the refund of Rs. 18038/- , the same cannot be refunded because the opposite party duly sent confirmation message to the complainant on mobile No. 8146525299 as provided at the time of booking and discharged its limited duty thereof.  It was submitted that non acknowledgement of the confirmed ticket by the complainant cannot be attributed to the opposite party. While submitting that the complainant is not entitled refund and while denying and controverting other allegations, prayer for  dismissal of complaint was made.

4.       In his bid to prove the case Sh. Deepinder Singh,Adv.counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-1, copy of credit card statement Ex.C-2 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

5.       To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh. Gaurav Arora,Adv. counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence duly sworn affidavit of Sh. Ekank Mehra,Asstt.Manager Ex.OPW/1, copy of resolution  Ex.OPW/A, copy of user agreement Ex.OPW/B, copy of snapshot of the pending payment Ex.OPW/C, copy of SMS history dated 14.4.2016 alongwith snapshot of the transaction history dated 14.4.2016 Ex.OPW/D and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite party.

6.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file.

7.       Ld.counsel for the complainant has reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint and has vehemently been contended that complainant through online system made the booking of Air ticket of Kualalampur to Hong Kong on 14.4.2016 and made payment of Rs. 18038/- through credit card of his brother which was debited from the said account with the opposite party. It has been contended on behalf of the complainant that the official of the opposite party intimated telephonically  to the complainant that the said booking was not confirmed . The complainant made futile visits to the opposite party for  refund of the said amount of Rs. 18038/- with the opposite party, but till date the opposite party has not refunded the said amount to the complainant. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.

8.       On the other hand opposite party repelled the aforesaid contentions of the ld.counsel for the complainant and has submitted that on April 14,2016 at 16:41:41 complainant visited the website of the opposite party for  booking of air ticket for Kualalumpur to Phuket Sector and  a booking id was given as NN7304112786923. However, the complainant’s booking was not generated successfully as the payment of Rs.16012/- was not received at the end of the opposite party in this regard snapshot of the pending payment of Rs. 16012/- is annexed herewith. It is pertinent to note that the complainant on April 14,2016 at 17:02:11 again initiated to generate the booking and the opposite party confirmed booking for the same sector as a sum of Rs. 18038/- was credited to the account of the opposite party. Thus a confirmation  SMS was sent to that effect on Mobile No. 8146525299  . As such the opposite party has discharged its limited liability by making the confirmed booking for the complainant as desired by him. The opposite party being a booking agent had issued the confirmed air ticket for Kuala Lumpur to Phuket for complainant being a booking agent discharged its duty. Ld.counsel for the opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

9.       From the appraisal of the evidence on record, it was the admitted case of the complainant that on April 14,2016 at 16:41:41 initially in the process for generating confirmed booking, complainant provided booking id as NN7304112786923. However, the said booking of the complainant was not generated successfully as the payment of Rs. 16012/- was not received at the end of the opposite party. In this regard opposite party has placed on record snapshot of the pending payment of Rs. 16012/-, copy of snapshot is Ex.OPW/C.  However , on April 14,2016 at 17:02:11 complainant again  initiated to generate the booking through his booking id NN2303916121186 which was successfully generated  as a sum of Rs. 18038/- was credited to the account of the complainant.  In this regard opposite party has placed on record copy of snapshot of the transaction history dated 14.4.2016 at 17:02:11 hrs vide which an amount of Rs. 18038/- has been credited to the account of the complainant through credit card. It was further submitted that confirmation SMS was sent to that effect on mobile No. 8146525299 as provided by the complainant and a copy of SMS history dated 14.4.2016 towards the confirmation for the booking of the complainant has been placed on record as Ex.OPW/D. Perusal of the SMS history produced by the opposite party Ex.OPW/D fully proves that it was made known to the complainant that his booking through id No.NN2303916121186 was successful and the complainant was informed through SMS that “for your journey from Kuala Lumpur-Phuket-Kuala Lumpur, the e-ticket has been sent to your e-mail address”. So as the complainant has booked his air ticket through online service of the opposite party, as such it was also the duty of the complainant to check whether the ticket has been confirmed or not. On the other hand the complainant has not produced any evidence to rebut the aforesaid evidence produced by the complainant except his own affidavit Ex.C-1 as well as copy of credit card statement Ex.C-2 the payment of  which was not denied by the opposite party. As such the opposite party has discharged its liability by making the confirmed booking for the complainant by sending an SMS on the mobile number of the complainant as provided by the complainant at the time of making of the booking in question.  The only contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant that as the opposite party has not sent any e-mail at the address of the complainant to make him aware about the confirmation of the ticket as well as the place from where the journey has to be started. But this contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant is without any weightage as the opposite party has already sent an SMS  on the mobile number of the complainant as provided by him at the time of booking of the ticket and made aware the complainant about the confirmation of the ticket as well as the detail of journey  and he was also made aware that e-ticket  of the complainant was sent at the e-mail address of the complainant. So if the complainant has booked his ticket through online service of the opposite party, he should be vigilant at his e-mail whether his ticket is confirmed or cancelled in that case also when the opposite party sent an SMS regarding confirmation of the ticket and also informed the complainant that his e-ticket was sent at the e-mail address of the complainant.

10.     Moreover at the stage of arguments, the opposite party has filed an application for additional evidence through which  the opposite party wants to tender e-ticket showing confirmed booking of the complainant in relation to ID No. NN2303916121186 -Sandeep Singh alongwith one Davinder Singh through the website  www.makemytrip.com . But the complainant has not filed any reply to that application even after affording 5 opportunities to file reply to that application for the reasons best known to him. As such  the Forum has passed an order dated 16.8.2017 that as the reply to the application by the complainant not filed. Application shall be decided with the main arguments. The plea of the complainant that the opposite party cannot go beyond the pleadings. In this regard complainant has placed reliance upon Vinod Kumar Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board & Ors in Revision Petition No. 4575 of 2010 decided on 6.5.2011 of the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in which it was held that in the absence of pleading evidence on a  particular point cannot be considered. But, however this plea of the complainant is not tenable as the opposite party has already taken the stand in his written version that SMS regarding confirmation of the ticket has been sent to the complainant at the mobile number as provided by the complainant at the time of booking. So there is no hitch to consider the documents as the opposite party wants to tender by filing additional evidence which are Annexure A-1(Colly) four in numbers as well as Annexure A-2 (Colly) two in numbers which fully proves that through e-mail sent to the complainant, the complainant was made aware regarding confirmation of ticket  as well as ticket numbers were also provided to the complainant. As such no reliance can be placed upon the authority (supra)  filed by the complainant .

11.     As the complainant was fully aware regarding the confirmation of the ticket through SMS on his mobile number provided by the complainant at the time of booking, as such the opposite party has discharged its limited liability  by making confirmed booking and it was the complainant who should be vigilant about the confirmation or cancellation of the ticket when he himself booked his ticket through online service of the opposite party.

12.     In view of the above discussion, we find no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. .   Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 26.9.2017