BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Rakesh Jain son of Sh.Jaswant Rai Jain, R/o H.No.3057, Sector 28-D, Chandigarh.

….…Complainant

                           V E R S U S

1]    M/s. Amazing Holidays, SCO 100-101, Ground Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh 160022, through its Prop./Partner Sh.Gurpreet Singh

2]    Sahibji Travesl & Tours Pvt. Ltd., 68/2276, Gurudwara road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi 110005, through its Managing Director.

                                  ..…Opposite Parties

CORAM:   SH.P.D.GOEL                                                PRESIDENT

                   SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL                          MEMBER

                   DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA   MEMBER

Argued by:        None for the Complainant.

Sh.Gaurav Bhardwaj, Proxy counsel for Sh.N.P.Sharma, Counsel for OP No.1.

Sh.Baljeet Singh, Counsel for OP-2.

PER DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER

             Succinctly put, the complainant, on being allured by the promise/assurance made by OP No.1 for booking of 200 Air tickets in a Single Flight or to get a Chartered Plane booked, deposited an amount of Rs.3.60 lacs in the account of OP-2.  But the OPs, instead of honouring their promise, booked the air tickets in different flights having different time of departure from Delhi and different time of arrival at Goa, which was bound to cause grave inconvenience and harassment, not only to the esteemed guests, but also to the complainant.  Resultantly, the complainant asked the OPs to cancel the booking.  It is averred that, on account of unprofessional approach of OPs, the complainant was constrained to cancel the function at Goa and other hotel bookings, which caused him huge losses, harassment as well as humiliation.  Therefore, the complainant sought refund of entire deposited amount from the OPs, but to no avail.  Even the legal notice sent to OPs did not yield any result.  Hence, this complaint.

2]           OP No.1 in its reply has stated that it only assisted the complainant to seek a travel agent of repute at New Delhi for the purpose of booking of 200 Air Tickets.  It was denied that OP-1 ever sought or was paid any consideration by the complainant for this assistance.  It was again denied, that any low cost domestic airline operates any aircraft on the said Sector of Travel, which could accommodate 200 passengers in one single flight. Whereas, the complainant’s demand for accommodating all 200 passengers/guests in one solitary flight, could not be technically & physically possible, as none of the three low cost domestic airlines (Go Air, Spice Jet and Indigo) operates an aircraft, which could have carried 200 passengers in one go.  It was termed wrong that OP-1 had ever advised the complainant to book the chartered flight or gave any assurance that all 200 guests would be booked in One Single Flight.  The role of OP No.1 was to assist the complainant without any consideration being gratis act.

              It was further averred that when OP-1 had not received any consideration from the complainant, it cannot be held liable for any deficiency in service rendered by OP-2.  Rather, the entire sum was paid by the complainant directly to OP-2 and it had been impleaded only to confer territorial jurisdiction.  OP No.2 had received the advance sum of Rs.3.60 lacs from the complainant directly for booking of 200 air tickets and thereafter upon the telephonic instructions of complainant, the air tickets were got cancelled, which had to incur cancellation & other charges.  Therefore, OP No.2 liable to refund only the balance amount.  Rest of the allegations, have been denied and it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

              OP NO.2, in its reply, pleaded that OP No.1 informed the complainant that the Chartered Plane for 200 persons was not economically possible.  The answering OP informed OP-1 that it can arrange 200 tickets in different flights and this proposal was accepted by the complainant, as per OP No.1.  Further, the amount of Rs.3.60 lacs was deposited by OP-1 in the account of answering OP and not directly by the complainant, as there was no direct deal between the complainant and answering OP.  It was further pleaded that OP NO.1 had sent a list of 23 persons by name on 8.1.2011, which was booked by the replying OP on the same day in Go Airlines.  Again, on the request of OP No.1, another 177 seats in different Airlines (Indigo & Spice Jet) were booked by the replying OP, against payment of 25%.  It was asserted that there was no deficiency in service on the part of replying OP, as the complainant had changed his programme due to his personal problems.  Since all the tickets were cancelled, it attracted the cancellation charges amounting to Rs.2,69,250/- apart from airlines transaction fee/charges of Rs.65,883/-, totaling to Rs.3,35,133/- (Ann.A-2 colly), which were duly accepted by OP-1 as well as the complainant.  Denying rest of the allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

3]           Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

4]           We have heard the Learned Counsel for the OPs and have also perused the record. 

5]           The main contention of the complainant in the present case is that fleeced by the high claims of OP No.1, to arrange 200 tickets in One Single Flight or to get a Chartered Plane booked, and relying thereupon, he deposited an advance of Rs.3.60 lacs in the account of OP-2 on 07.01.2011.  But the OPs, instead of honouring their commitment as promised/required, booked the air tickets in different flights having different time of departure & arrival from Delhi to Goa.  Therefore, on account of such callous & unprofessional approach of OPs, it was bound to cause grave inconvenience and harassment, not only to the passengers/guests, but to the complainant as well.   Resultantly, the complainant was constrained to scrap/cancel the schedule function at Goa as well as booking in the Hotels there and subsequently, sought refund from the OPs.  Such act & conduct of the OPs certainly caused huge losses and grave harassment & humiliation to the complainant and other passengers/guests.

6]           On the other hand, OP No.1, in its reply, stated that it had neither received any consideration from the complainant for any services nor had ever assured that all 200 guests would be booked in One Single Flight, as alleged.  It had only assisted the complainant without any consideration. OP No.1 had denied any deficiency in service on its part, rather contended that the contentions of the complainant is totally false, frivolous and baseless.  It was further pleaded that the complainant got his tickets cancelled on the pretext of change in the programme due to his personal problem for which cancellation charged were bound to attract/levied.

7]           Whereas, OP No.2 in its reply, though admitted the booking of air tickets, but denied the booking of 200 tickets in One Single Flight.  The OP-2 submitted that OP No.1 had duly infirmed the complainant that Chartered Plane for 200 persons was not economically possible and as such informed that it (OP-2) can arrange 200 tickets in different flights.  It was only after accepting such proposal by OP-1, an amount of Rs.3.60 lacs was deposited on 7.1.2011 in the account of OP-2 by OP No.1 directly and not by the complainant.  Henceforth, there was no direct deal between the complainant and OP No.2.  It was also  contended that as the complainant had changed his programme due to his own personal problems, all booked tickets were cancelled on his asking, which certainly had to attract the airline cancellation charges amounting to Rs.2,69,250/- as well as Airlines Transaction Charges of Rs.65,883/-, totaling Rs.3,35,133/-.

8]           Going into facts & circumstances of the present complaint as well as after perusing the documentary evidence, placed on file by both the parties, the point which is to be determined and to be taken care is, Whether the OP No.1 ever assured the complainant of booking 200 tickets in One single Flight or to get a Chartered Plane, for which the payment was made to OP No.2.  The onus to prove this fact was squarely lies on the complainant.

9]           However, the complainant has not been able to prove on record by way of leading/placing any documentary/authentic proof that OP No.1 or OP No.2 ever assured/promised him about booking of 200 tickets in One Single Flight or to get a Chartered Plane, as alleged in the complaint.  Mere verbal or bald assertion of the complainant, in this regard, is not sufficient & sustainable, in the absence of any substantial/cogent evidence/ document.  Hence, this plea of the complainant cannot be believed and relied upon.

10]         Furthermore, in the e-mail, placed on record by the complainant, at Page No.12, from Rakesh Jain to OP NO.1, the following has been mentioned :

              “Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2011 8:01 PM

Subject: Re; Cancellation of wedding group 200 pax.

              Dear Mr. Singh,

We had already informed u about the cancellation on 13th Jan as we were not interested in the way flight schedule was made.  So we scrapped our destination program and informed you. We already intimated you on time. “

11]         This e-mail did not favour/prove the case of the complainant, that the OPs had ever made any such promises, as alleged in the complaint. It (e-mail) only speaks/made out that as the complainant and others were not interested in the way, flight schedule was made, so they scrap their destination programme and requested for cancellation.

12]         It is not disputed, rather an admitted fact that the OP No.2 had booked all 200 tickets, though it was of different flights.  When the tickets have been booked and later on got cancelled by the complainant, for whatsoever reasons; it would certainly attract cancellation and other charges as per the rules of Airlines.  Hence forth, the OPs cannot be held liable to pay for the cancellation charges, which had been deducted by the concerned Airline Authorities.  Hence, no deficiency in service is attributed towards OPs. 

13]         Henceforth, keeping in view the entirety of the case, foregoing discussion as well as findings, we deem it appropriate to direct the OPs to refund the balance amount of the complainant i.e.Rs.24,867/-, if not yet paid, along with interest 9% p.a. w.e.f. 15.1.2011 (the date when e-mail was sent to OP-2 seeking cancellation of flight and refund of full amount) till its actual payment. There is no order as to compensation or costs. The complaint stands disposed of in above terms.

              Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.