Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/309/2015

Viswajeet Khanna - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Go Airlines India Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

D.S. Sobti

08 Dec 2015

ORDER

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

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/309/2015
Date  of  Institution	:	20/05/2015
Date   of   Decision	:	08/12/2015

 

 

 

 

 

Viswajeet Khanna son of Sh.L.D.Khanna, 916, Sector 39-A, Chandigarh.

……….. Complainant.

VERSUS

 

1.   M/s Go Airlines India Pvt. Limited, 1^st Floor, C-1, Wadia International Centre (WIC), Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbai, Near Landmark Deepak Talkies, Maharashtra – 400025, through its Chairman/MD/ authorized person.

 

2.   M/s MakeMy Trip India Pvt. Ltd., 243, Tower A, SP Infocity, Udyog Vihar, Phase-I, Sector 20, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122016, through its Chairman/MD/ Authorized person.

……….. Opposite Parties 

 

BEFORE:   MRS.SURJEET KAUR             PRESIDING MEMBER

          SH. SURESH KUMAR SARDANA     MEMBER

 

For Complainant	:	Sh. D.S. Sobti, Advocate.
For OP No.1	:	Ex-parte.
For OP No.2	:	Sh. Naveen Sharma, Advocate.

 

PER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBER

 

         

1.      Tersely, the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the disposal of the instant Consumer Complaint and emanating from the record are that, the Complainant booked confirmed air tickets for him and his family members from Chandigarh to Goa for 11.01.2014 of Opposite Party No.1 through Portal/Website of Opposite Party No.2 (Annexure C-1). The Opposite Party No.1, in an unprofessional manner, on the eleventh hour sent SMS on 10.01.2014 at 10:30 PM intimating about the cancellation of the flight, without any valid justification. Consequently, the Complainant had to book the tickets in another flight (IndiGo) after paying Rs.22,632/- (Annexure C-2). On the next morning, on enquiry from the office of Opposite Party No.1 at Chandigarh Airport, the Complainant was told that Chandigarh – Mumbai flight had departed on time and it was only Mumbai – Goa connecting flight which was cancelled and the Complainant & his family members were shown as passengers on the aircraft between Chandigarh to Mumbai. Even, the Opposite Party No.2 when contacted feigned ignorance with respect to cancelled flight. Eventually, the Complainant got served a legal notice dated 06.03.2014 upon the Opposite Parties, demanding a sum of Rs.22,636/- on account of excess paid for re-booking the flight, along with compensation, but to no avail. It has been stated that the aforesaid acts of the Opposite Parties, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. When the grievance of the complainant, has not been redressed, left with no alternative, the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the Act only), has been filed before this Forum, seeking various reliefs.

 

2.      Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of the Opposite Party No.1 despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte on 02.07.2015.

 

3.      Opposite Party No.2 in its reply, while admitting the factual matrix of the case has pleaded that it being the booking facilitator duly discharged its limited liability inter alia issuing confirmed air tickets for Complainant. Subsequently, if at all any default, as alleged, is made on the part of Opposite Party No.1 by wrongfully informing the Complainant via SMS that the flight has been cancelled, which was actually not cancelled, the Opposite Party No.2 cannot be held liable for the negligence at the end of Opposite Party No.1. Denying all other allegations Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

 

4.      Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record in support of their contentions.

 

5.      We have heard the learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 and have also perused the record, along with the written arguments filed on behalf of the Complainant. 

 

6.      In the present circumstances, the averments of the complaint have gone unrebutted in the absence of the Opposite Party No.1, who were duly served, and preferred neither to appear in person, nor through its Counsel. It is established beyond all reasonable doubts that the complaint of the Complainant is genuine. The harassment suffered by the Complainant on account of wrong cancellation message sent by Opposite Party No.1, is also writ large. Thus, finding a definite deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party No.1, we have no other alternative, but to allow the present complaint against the Opposite Party No.1.

 

7.      In the light of above observations, the present complaint succeeds against the Opposite Party No.1 alone. The same is allowed. We direct the Opposite Party No.1:-            
   1. To pay Rs.22,636/- to the Complainant on account of excess paid for re-booking the flights;
   2. To pay Rs.30,000/- as compensation for mental agony & harassment suffered by the complainant;
   3. To pay Rs.15,000/- as costs of litigation.

 

 

          The Complaint against Opposite Party No.2 is dismissed.

 

8.      The above said order be complied with by the Opposite Party No.1, within 30 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the amounts at Sr. No.[a] & [b] shall carry interest @12% per annum from the date of filing of the present Complaint, till actual payment, besides payment of litigation costs.

 

9.      The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

08^th December, 2015                                            

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER