Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/553/2015

Sandeep Gilhotra - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s AN American Travel & Tours (P) Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Vishal Bali

31 Aug 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                               

 

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/553/2015
Date of Institution	:	19/08/2015
Date of Decision	:	31/08/2016

 

 

1.     Sandeep Gilhotra son of late Sh. Munshi Ram Gilhotra r/o H.No.602, Sector-18, Chandigarh.

2.     Ranjna Gilhotra wife of Sh. Sandeep Gilhotra r/o H.No.602, Sector 18, Chandigarh

…..Complainants

V E R S U S

1.     M/s AN American Travel & Tours (P) Ltd. through its Managing Director, SCO No.90-92, 1^st Floor, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh.

        2^nd Address :

        M/s AN American Travel & Tour (P) Ltd., through its Managing Director, SCO No.91-92-93, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh

2.     United Airways Airlines, through its Manager, Kolkata Sales Office, Saberwal House, 55B, Mirza Galeeb Street, Kolkata-700016.

3.     M/s Unique Worldwide Travels Solution, through its Manager, SCO No.23-25, Basement Cabin No.8, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh.

4.     United Airlines Inc., through its Customer Relations Manager, 124, Janpath Thapar House, Ground Floor, New Delhi-110001.

        2^nd Address :

        United Airlines Inc., 1600, Smith Street Houston, Texas 77002, USA.

……Opposite Parties

 

QUORUM:	DR. MANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                       

                                                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Vishal Bali, Counsel for complainant
	:	OPx ex-parte

                       

                 

PER DR. MANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

1.         Sh. Sandeep Gilhotra and Smt. Ranjna Gilhotra, complainants have brought this consumer complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against M/s AN American Travel & Tours (P) Ltd. and others, Opposite Parties (hereinafter called the OPs), for directing the OPs to pay Rs.7,440/- being the amount charged by the United Airline authorities, Rs.50,000/- for mental harassment, Rs.25,000/- for physical harassment, damages of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.30,000/- as litigation expenses.

                In brief, the facts of the case are that the complainants, who are husband and wife, purchased three air tickets from OP-1 – two for themselves and one for their relative - for going to USA and Canada. The complainants on 28.2.2014 paid a sum of Rs.1,04,000/- for each ticket and the total cost of the tickets was Rs.2,08,000/-. The payment receipts were issued by OP-1 on 3.3.2014.  At the time of booking/purchasing the air tickets, the complainants asked OP-1 to book the tickets for such flights which allow two baggage per person so that they could travel easily through connecting flight during the entire trip. OP-1 assured and confirmed to the complainants that two baggage will be allowed per person throughout the journey on all connected flights mentioned in the tickets because the tickets issued to the complainants are Star Alliance Airlines Tickets. The complainants were to travel from Anchorage to New York on United Airlines. When they reached the Anchorage International Airport to board their flight No.UA 1001 to Chicago and catch the onward flight No.AC 7479 to New York, the authorities/staff present at the airport counter asked the complainants to pay for the second baggage which was not at all chargeable. It is alleged by the complainants that they have to face humiliation and torture at the airport as they were not allowed two baggage and compelled to make payment of $ 120.  The complainants lodged claim with OP-1 who assured to look into the matter, but, nothing was done. Hence, this consumer complaint claiming the reliefs mentioned above.

2.         Notices of the consumer complaint were sent to all the OPs.  However, except OP-2, none of the OPs appeared as such they were proceeded exparte. OP-2 filed written objections to the complaint denying its liability, however, later on it also did not turn up.  Accordingly, OP-2 was also proceeded exparte.
3.         The complainants led evidence in support of their contentions. 
4.         We have gone through the record and heard the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the complainants.
5.         Annexure C-1 and C-2 are the copies of the invoices which prove that both the complainants purchased the air tickets for a sum of Rs.2,08,000/-. There is no dispute about availing the air facility by the complainants. The dispute is only with regard to the baggage which were carried by the complainants in their flights. The complainants have proved on record by producing Annexure C-11 that they have to pay USD 120 extra for their luggage. The affidavit of the complainants prove that at Anchorage International Airport the staff of United Airlines did not allow the second baggage and charged USD 120 extra from them. Annexure C-15 is a copy of the ticket of the complainants which prove that OP-1 had assured that each passenger was entitled to carry 2 pieces of luggage. Annexure C-18 is reply to the email of the complainants which proves that carrying of two pieces baggage was confirmed by the airline. Thus, it is proved that the complainants, who were assured by OP-1 that they could carry two baggage (2 pieces of luggage) were not allowed to carry the same and they have to spend USD 120 more.  It was the duty of OP-1 to confirm first from the concerned airline as to whether the two baggage would be allowed or not.  In case OP-1 had booked the tickets without any confirmation from the side of the airline, then it amounts to deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on its part because for its petty gains, OP-1 had put the complainants in trouble as they have to pay additional amount of USD 120. 
6.         It is pertinent to mention that Annexure C-11 did not specify as to whether USD 120 was charged for additional baggage or because of overweight of the baggage. Even if it is presumed that the charges were for overweight of the baggage, then also OP-1 did not disclose to the complainants how much weight they could carry in their baggage. The invoices (Annexure C-1 & C-2) and the e-ticket nowhere indicates about the weight to be carried in the baggage. Otherwise also, since OP-1 did not prefer to contest the consumer complaint, so the stand taken by the complainants remain unrebutted and it is to be believed that the complainants had to pay USD 120 for carrying two baggage as they were only permitted to carry one baggage.  Thus, the conduct of OP-1 in giving assurance to the complainants that they could carry two baggage (2 pieces of luggage) amounts to unfair trade practice. The complainants are entitled to the refund of the amount of USD 120 = Rs.7,440/- as also some compensation because they have to suffer harassment and mental agony.
7.         Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances narrated above, we have no hesitation that the present complaint deserves to succeed. The same is accordingly partly allowed. OP-1 is directed as under:-

(i)     To pay Rs.7,440/-, which the complainants had to pay for extra baggage, alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint, till realization;

(ii)    To pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment caused to the complainants;

(iii)   To pay Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation to the complainants. 

8.         This order be complied with by OP-1 within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
9.         Since the contract was only with OP-1, as such, there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OPs 2 to 4 and the complaint qua them is dismissed with no order as to costs.
10.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
31/08/2016	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Dr. Manjit Singh]
hg	Member	Member	President