Tripura

StateCommission

A/40/2016

Spicejet Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mr. Deepankar Chakraborty - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. B.N Majumder, Mr. J.Chakraborty, Mr. R.Saha, Mr. D.J. Saha

29 Mar 2017

ORDER

 

Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Agartala.

 

Case No.A.40.2016

 

 

1. SpiceJet Ltd.,

319 Udyog Vihar, Phase-IV,

Gurgaon-12206, Haryana.

 

2. Station Manager,

SpiceJet Ltd.

Agartala Airport, Agartala-799009.

… … … … Appellants/Opposite Parties.

 

 

1. Shri Deepankar Chakraborty,

S/o Late Manik Lal Chakraborty

of Kadamtala, Krishnanagar,

Agartala, West Tripura.

… … … … … Respondent/Complainant.

 

2. Hindustan Tour & Travels

07, L.N. Bari Road, Agartala,

West Tripura, Pin:799001.

… … … … … Respondent/Opposite Party No.3.

 

Present

 

Mr. Justice U.B. Saha,

President,

State Commission, Tripura.

 

Mrs. Sobhana Datta,

Member,

State Commission, Tripura.

 

Mr. Narayan Chandra Sharma,

Member,

State Commission, Tripura.

 

For the Appellants:                     Mr. Rajib Saha, Adv.

For the Respondent No.1:                 In person.

For the Respondent No.2:                 Absent.

Date of Hearing and Delivery of Judgment: 29.03.2017.

 

J U D G M E N T [O R A L]

 

 

U.B. Saha, J,

The instant appeal is filed by the appellants SpiceJet Ltd. and Station Manager, SpiceJet Ltd. Agartala Airport under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the judgment dated 11.04.2016 passed by the Ld. District Consumers Disputes Redressal Forum, West Tripura, Agartala (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Case No. C.C. 24 of 2015 along with an application for condoning the delay of 134 days in preferring the appeal against the aforesaid judgment.    

3. Heard Mr. Rajib Saha, Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellants (hereinafter referred to as opposite party nos.1 & 2) as well as Shri Deepankar Chakraborty, the respondent no.1 (hereinafter referred to as complainant) who is an Advocate, appearing in person.
4. In the condonation petition, the reasons for delay have been explained in Paragraph-3 and 4 of the petition wherein it is stated that the impugned judgment was passed on 11.04.2016 and the appeal was to be filed within 30 days i.e. on or before 11.05.2016, but in preferring appeal, there was a delay of 134 days. It is also stated that the copy of the judgment was received on 26.04.2016 by the opposite party no.2 from the office of the Ld. District Forum. Thereafter, the copy of the judgment was transmitted to the corporate office situated at Gurgaon, Haryana on 30.04.2016, but the said certified copy did not reach to the corporate office and the same was perhaps lost on transit. Since the copy of the impugned judgment was not reached to the corporate office of the appellants, who is the ultimate authority to decide as to whether the SpiceJet would prefer and/or not prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment, filing of an appeal against the impugned judgment could not be decided. After receipt of notice dated 24.08.2016 issued by the District Forum in the execution proceeding on 27.08.2016, the said notice was sent to the corporate office and it could be known that the certified copy of the impugned judgment dated 11.04.2016 had not reached the corporate office till then. It is further contended that on instructions of corporate office, the opposite party no.2, the Station Manager, SpiceJet Ltd., Agartala Airport applied for the certified copy on 21.08.2016 and the same was received on the same date and copy of the judgment was transmitted to the corporate office at Gurgaon, which was received by the corporate office on 05.09.2016. Thereafter, the appeal was filed on 22.09.2016 along with the condonation petition under section 14 of the C.P. Act, which was subsequently amended on 08.11.2016.
5. The respondent i.e. the complainant had filed written objection against the prayer for condonation.    
6. We have gone through the reasons for delay as explained in the condonation petition. According to us, the delay has not been properly explained, rather it appears from the explanation that there were some negligence on the part of appellant-opposite parties. However, as the complainant consented for allowing the condonation petition, subject to payment of Rs.15,000/- and the Ld. Counsel who appeared along with the opposite party no.2 submits that the opposite parties are ready to pay Rs.10,000/- as cost subject to this Commission allows the prayer for condonation of delay. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the interest of justice, the delay of 134 days is hereby condoned subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as cost and accordingly, the appeal is admitted.
7. As the District Forum record has already been received by this Commission and the parties are agreed to for hearing of the appeal finally at this stage, the appeal is taken up for hearing.
8. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the appellants as well as complainant in person. 
9. Admitted facts are that on 04.07.2014, the complainant purchased up and down ticket for availing journey from Agartala to Kolkata and from Kolkata to Agartala return. On the date of journey on 15.12.2014, the opposite parties SpiceJet informed by SMS that flight was cancelled. As the complainant had already purchased railway ticket for journey from Howrah to Hyderabad for his treatment, he purchased tickets from Air India by paying Rs.24,500/-. After purchasing of the tickets from Air India, the opposite parties SpiceJet informed that his flight has been rescheduled, not cancelled. Thus, the complainant had to cancel Air India flight and went to Kolkata on 15.12.2014 at 05.50 P.M. by the SpiceJet flight. The date of return journey was scheduled on 31.12.2014, but on 23.12.2014, the complainant was informed by the opposite parties SpiceJet that his flight from Kolkata to Agartala was cancelled as scheduled on 31.12.2014. Thereafter, the complainant purchased three tickets from Air India, cost of which was Rs.31,734/- and out of that Rs.7,500/- was refunded by the appellant-opposite parties. Being complainant suffered financial loss and he was harassed and also there was complete deficiency of service by the opposite parties, he has filed the complaint petition claiming Rs.1,28,740/-.
10. The opposite party nos.1 & 2 filed their written statement denying the claim of the complainant contending that Company reserved the right for cancellation for delay of flight and carrier is not liable for damage as occasioned by delay. The departure time was rescheduled and no damage was caused to the petitioner.
11. On the basis of the evidence on record, the District Forum allowed the complaint petition directing the opposite parties SpiceJet to pay Rs.24,740/- i.e. the difference of price, Rs.31,740 – Rs.7,000 (cost of Air India tickets) + Rs.4,500/- as cancellation charge of the Air India tickets and also Rs.15,000/- for deficiency of service and another Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation, in total Rs.49,240/- to be paid to the petitioner-complainant within two months, if the same is not paid within the stipulated period, then the same will carry interest @9% per annum.
12. As both the parties agreed for disposal of the appeal on the following terms and conditions, we are not entering into the merit of the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of with the following directions that the petitioner-complainant will be entitled to get Rs.10,000/- as cost for allowing condonation petition and Rs.4,500/- for cancellation charge of the Air India tickets and Rs.15,000/- for deficiency of service and Rs.5,000/- for cost of litigation in total Rs.34,500/-.
13. Accordingly, appeal is disposed of directing the opposite parties SpiceJet to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.34,500/- to the petitioner-complainant within a period of six weeks from today, if the aforesaid amount is not paid within the aforesaid period, then the same will carry interest @9% per annum.     

In view of the above, impugned judgment passed by the Ld. District Forum is modified to the extent indicated above. Appeal is partly allowed.

This order will not be treated as a precedent being the same is passed as consented by the parties.  

Copy of this judgment be sent to the Ld. Counsel of the parties for compliance.

Send down the records to the Ld. District Forum, West Tripura, Agartala.

 

 

 

MEMBER State Commission Tripura MEMBER State Commission Tripura PRESIDENT State Commission Tripura