Delhi

New Delhi

CC/117/2014

Richa Bhatia - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Air India Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

-

26 Apr 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-VI

(NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

Case No.CC-117/2014

IN THE MATTER OF:

Smt. Richa Bhatia

W/o Sh. Vinod Bhatia

R/o F 21 ParshantVihar

New Delhi-110085.

Mobile: 9999039207                                                              

...Complainant   

VERSUS

1. M/s Air India

113, Airlines House, GurudwaraRakabganj Road

New Delhi-110001.

Phone No. 011-23422000                              

2. M/s Riya Travels and Tours

119, New Delhi House, 27 Barakhamba Road

Connaught Place

New Delhi-110001.

Phone No. 011-61608080/Fax No.: 011-66290333

3. M/s Durga International

LB-31, Prakash Deep Building

7 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi-110001

Phone No. 011-23310550/011-23711070

                                       …Opposite Parties

Quorum:

Ms. PoonamChaudhry, President

Mr. Bariq Ahmad, Member

Mr. Shekhar Chandra, Member

Date of Institution :07.02.2014

                                                                     Date of Order          :26.04.2023

ORDER

SHEKHAR CHANDRA, MEMBER

          The facts as adumbrated in the complaint are as under:

1. The complainant purchased four tickets for self, two daughters and her mother for flight ODEL A1/310 and OHKG AI 317 on 10.06.12 and 15.06.2012 from Delhi to Hongkong and back through an agent opposite party No. 3-M/s Durga International vide bill No. 357 dated 4^th May 2012.
2. These tickets were booked further by opposite party No. 3-M/s Durga International from opposite party No. 2 - M/s Riya Travels.                     Rs. 1,17,000/- were paid for these tickets.  The complainant and the other three members of the family were to join Mr. Vinod Bhatia, the husband of Mrs. Richa Bhatia- Complainant, at Hongkong on 11.06.2012 as he was in Hongkong for Group Study Exchange Program of Rotary International from 12^th May 2012 to 10^th June 2012.
3. On 4^th June, 2012 Mr. Vinod Bhatia, the husband of the complainant came to know about cancellation of AI flights to Hongkong. He sent email to Opposite Party No. 3 - M/s Durga International on 4^th June 2012 itself. No response came from them. He contacted their office on phone but no suitable reply or alternative air arrangement was made. He again sent mail to all the three concerned agencies namely Opposite Party No. 1 - Air India, Opposite Party No. 3 - M/s Durga International and Opposite Party No. 2 - M/s Riya travels on 6^th June 2012 but there was no response from either of them.
4. The complainant alleges that finally she purchased four air tickets for self, her mother and two daughters for flight of Jet Airways 9W78 and 9W77 on 10.06.12 and 15.06.2012 for Delhi-Hongkong and Back. These air tickets were booked through another agent namely M/s Alpine travels vide invoice no IS/296 dated 06.06.2012.
5. After performance of the journey, the complainant when contacted for refund, proper response was not given by both Opposite Parties Nos. 2 and 3 namely M/s Riya travel and M/s Durga International. Complainant was surprised to see an email of Opposite Party No. 2 - M/s Riya travels on 04.07.2013 in response to her husband’s email dated 04.07.2013 wherein whole issue was diverted towards Opposite Party No. 3-M/s Durga International.
6. It is submitted by the complainant that Opposite Party No.3-M/s Durga International wrote to Opposite Party No.2-M/s Riya Travel on 06.07.2013 wherein it was admitted by Opposite Party No.3-M/s Durga International that there was no response from both Opposite Party No.2-M/s Riya and Opposite Party No.1-Air India  as they failed in inform the passengers about non-operation of flight.
7. The complainant further submits that it was surprising that ticket refund of one of the four passengers namely Richa Bhatia was kept pending because of re-issue of ticket and this ticket was re-issued by airline without knowledge of Richa Bhatia.  She thus argues that this action of the Airline indicates that Opposite Party No.1-Air India received mail dated 4^th June, 2012 of her husband Mr. Vinod Bhatia but they did not inform the complainant/passengers about re-issue of tickets or any other alternative arrangement being made by them.
8. The complainant further submits that when proper response was not given, further complaint was filed with Opposite Party No. 1-Air India vide reference number WB-IDEL 160712019. A separate mail under subject of “Harassment” was made at call.
9. It is further submitted that vide email dated 13.09.2012 the complainant demanded from Opposite Party No. 1-Air India, Opposite Party No. 2-M/s Durga International and Opposite Party No. 3-M/s Riya travel, Rs.1,80,000/- i.e. Rs.80,000/- as extra cost of airfare and Rs. One Lakh for menal harassment; no heed was paid by any of the opposite parties as mentioned above.
10. On 28^th September, 2012, the complainant thus finally lodged a complaint at feedback.airindia.in. The complainant received a response dated 09.10.2012 to her email but it is alleged that it was full of lies. It is further alleged that vide their email dated 29.11.2012, the Opposite Party No.1-Air India again tried to mislead and held travel agents, Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3 only responsible for whole problem.
11. In order to expose their lies, complainant asked for information under RTI Act vide letter dated 20^th August 2013. There was no reply and an appeal to Appellate Authority was made on 1^st November 2013 which too went unanswered. The complainant had to file a Second Appeal with CIC.
12. The complainant states that due to irresponsible behavior and negligence of the opposite parties, complainant had to face lot of problems and suffered a huge financial loss. It is submitted that the opposite parties played a fraud with the sentiments of the complainant and her family members, for which the opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainant and thus complainant prays for a compensation of Rs.4,80,000/- for mental agony, harassment, financial losses and waste of time caused by the opposite parties’ acts because the opposite parties as service providers, have failed to provide their best services to the complainant. The complainant thus submits that it is a clear cut deficiency in services of the respondents, for which the respondents are liable to compensate the complainant.
13. Thus the complainant has approached this Commission with the prayers that a directions be issued to the opposite parties to refund Rs.80,000/-  with interest and the opposite parties be directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation for the mental torture, pain and agony and also pay Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.
14. Notice of the complaint issued to OP-1 to 3 pursuant to which OP-1 to 3 entered appearance and filed written statement.
15. In its reply, the opposite party No.1 – Air India submits that the aforesaid flights were cancelled due to industrial unrest/pilot strike as evident from  OP1's email dated 09.10.2012, issued in response to the Complainant's complaint lodged on OP1's website on 28.09.2012. Vide the aforesaid email as well as emails dated 11.10.2012 and 29.11.2012 to the Complainant, OP1 further explained that upon cancellation of any flights of OP1, OP1's system automatically generates messages informing all travel agents regarding the same and no separate mails are issued to individual passengers who are informed only on their local contact numbers where they have provided the same to the airlines directly/ through their respective travel agents at the time of booking. In the present case, OP1 duly informed all passengers and travel agents who had provided their local contact numbers as aforesaid, vide its system generated messages. Moreover, the Complainant could not be directly informed about the aforesaid cancellation since the Complainant's local contact number had not been provided by OP2 while booking the aforesaid tickets. Further, OP2 could not be contacted by OP1 regarding the aforesaid cancellation despite OP2 providing its own contact number for booking the aforesaid tickets. In view of the above, it was the sole responsibility of OP2 and/or OP3 to inform the Complainant regarding cancellation of the aforesaid flights, since not only was there no information provided to OP1 for directly contacting the Complainant but it is the travel agent's duty to inform its customers for whom it has booked the tickets. Moreover, as explained above, OP1 had already taken all efforts to inform OP2 regarding the aforesaid cancellation, which should have been duly informed to the Complainant by OP2 and/or OP3.
16. In relation to the aforesaid claims by the Complainant, OP1 submits that as a result of it being an airline engaged in the air travel service sector, OP1 is governed by the Civil Aviation Requirements issued by the Government of India. In particular, the Civil Aviation Requirements for Air Transport, Series M, Part IV dated 06.08.2010 effective from 15.08.2010 (hereinafter referred to as "CAR-MIV") and the Civil Aviation Requirements for Air Transport, Series M, Part II dated 22.05.2008 effective forthwith (hereinafter referred to as "CAR-MII"), are relevant for consideration herein. As per Clause 3.8.1 of CAR-MIV, which has been extracted below, the duty to inform passengers regarding denied boarding, cancellations or delays of their flights, lies on OP1 subject to the condition that at the time of booking of tickets, such passengers have given adequate contact information to OP1 or the travel agents, which in this case are OP2 and OP3-

"3.8.1...Passengers shall be fully informed by the airlines of their rights in the event of denied boarding, cancellations or delays of their flights so that they can effectively exercise their rights provided at the time of making bookings/ticketing, they have given adequate contact information to the airline or their agents...." (emphasis added)

17. The opposite party No. 1 submits that in view of the above, even assuming that the Complainant had provided adequate contact information to its travel agents OP2 and OP3, the said information could have been communicated to OP1 so that it could have timely informed the Complainant regarding the cancellation and when the Complainant had duly informed OP2 and OP3 regarding the cancellation, the same should have been communicated to the Complainant by OP2 and/or OP3. In such a scenario, OP1 cannot be held liable whatsoever for any non-communication or delay in communication of the aforesaid cancellation to the Complainant.
18. It is argued that as per Clause 1.4 of CAR-MIV, airlines have been exempted from payment of compensation in respect of cancellation and delay of flights in the following circumstances -

“1.4 The operating airline would not have the obligation to pay compensation in cases where the cancellations and delays have been caused by an event(s) of force majeure i.e. extraordinary circumstance(s) beyond the control of the airline, the impact of which lead to the cancellation/delay of flight(s), and which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken by the airline. Such extraordinary circumstances may in particular, occur due to political instability, natural disaster, civil war, insurrection or riot, flood, explosion, government regulation or order affecting the aircraft, strikes and labour disputes causing cessation, slowdown interruption of work or any other factors that are beyond the control of the airline."

19. It is submitted that incidentally, the Complainant purchased fresh tickets for the aforesaid flight route vide Jet Airways, through M/s Alpine Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd. on 06.06.2012. In view of Clause 1.4 of CAR-MIV, the Complainant is not entitled to any such compensation as a result of the cancellation being a result of industrial unrest/pilot strike which is a force majeure event. This was already communicated to the Complainant by OP1 vide its emails dated 09.10.2012, 11.10.2012 and 29.11.2012, who further advised the Complainant to address its concerns to the travel agents through whom it booked its tickets.
20. Further it is submitted that as per Clause 3.3.5 of CAR-MIV, in case of cancellation of flight, the refund of air ticket is to be made in accordance with CAR-MII and Clause 3(c) of CAR-MII clearly provides that in case of purchase of tickets through travel agents, the arrangement of refund has been left to the passenger and the travel agent. As seen from the statement of account submitted by OP3 as annexure to its reply and Exhibit RW3/5 to its affidavit in evidence to the Complaint, the total cost of the aforesaid cancelled tickets, amounting to Rs.1,17,000/- had been fully refunded by OP3 to the Complainant vide 3 cheques  dated 13.07.2012 and 04.08.2012 respectively, which fact is also admitted in the Complainant's email dated 13.09.2012 to OP1. Further, from OP3's email dated 06.07.2012 to OP2, it is evident that the aforesaid refund was being processed by OP2. Consequently, the refund was rightly processed and settled between the aforesaid travel agents, OP2 and OP3, and the Complainant, with no direct involvement of OP1, in accordance with the aforesaid provisions under CAR. In view of the above, not only is it not OP1's duty to directly initiate refund process of the cancelled tickets but the refund process had to be initiated by OP2 and OP3, the Complainant's travel agents, through whom the aforesaid tickets had been booked.
21. It is further argued that the Complainant seeks to unjustly enrich herself at the expense of the OP1 by filing the present false and vexatious Complaint, which is liable to be dismissed. The aforesaid tickets had been booked by the Complainant through OP3 and OP2, who had only provided their own local contact numbers instead of the Complainant's at the time of booking, and as a result of which OP1 was unable to directly communicate any information regarding the cancellation of the aforesaid tickets to the Complainant. Further, OP1 had undertaken all efforts to duly intimate all travel agents, including OP3 and OP2, regarding the aforesaid cancellation, including by way of system generated messages to their local contact numbers. However, OP2 could not be contacted by OP1 for the aforesaid cancellation despite OP2 providing its own contact number for booking the aforesaid tickets. As per Clause 3.8.1 of CAR-MIV, the duty to inform passengers regarding cancellations of their flights, lies on OPI subject to the condition that at the time of booking of tickets, such passengers have given adequate contact information to OP1 or the travel agents, which in this case are OP2 and OP3. In view of the above, OP1 cannot be held liable whatsoever for any non-communication or delay in communication of the aforesaid cancellation to the Complainant.
22. It is further submitted that the Complainant is not entitled to any compensation in the form of difference of fare paid by the Complainant towards the aforesaid fresh tickets purchased by it through M/s Alpine Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd., in view of Clause 1.4 of CAR-MIV, as a result of the aforesaid cancellation being a result of industrial unrest/pilot strike which is a force majeure event. As per Clause 1.4 of CAR-MIV, airlines have been exempted from payment of compensation in respect of cancellation of flights due to force majeure events, including "strikes and labour disputes causing cessation, slowdown or interruption of work or any other factors that are beyond the control of the airline". Thus, it is argued by the OP 1 that the Complaint has failed to prove the existence of any cause of action in favour of the Complainant and against OP1 and also does not entitle the Complainant to any right or remedy against OP1 since its entire grievance is solely a result of failure in timely communication of the information relating to cancellation of the aforesaid tickets by its travel agents, OP2 and OP3. OP1 submits that there has been no failure on its part in communication of such information to the Complainant's travel agents, OP2 and OP3, which should have been duly communicated by the aforesaid agents to the Complainant, as explained above.
23. Reply has also been filed on behalf of OP-2. It is submitted by the OP-2 that on the request of O.P.No.3, the O.P. No.2 had booked Air India flight/opposite party No. 1’s tickets. So there is no direct relationship between the complainant and O.P.No.2. The complainant does not have any legal right, title and interest to claim any relief against the O.P.-No.2 as O.P. No.2 had booked Confirmed Air tickets of the complainant on behalf of the O.P. No.3 It is further submitted that there is no direct connection between O.P. No.2 and the complainant, hence there is no liability of opposite party No 2 as O.P. No.2 had done their work with good service, care and cautions. It is further argued that the entire complaint is sheer misuse and abuse of process of law and the same is resting upon the false, fabricated and manipulated allegations against O.P.No.2.The averments made in the complaint does not disclose any cause of action in favour of the complainant and against the Opposite Party No. 2. It is further submitted that the full amount of tickets have already been refunded to the complainant as per rule, hence the Opposite Party No. 2 is not liable to pay the alleged amount to the complainant.
24. In reply to this complaint, the opposite party No. 3 submits that it is having tour and travel business under the name of DURGA INTERNATIONAL, situated at LB-31, Prakash Deep Building, 7, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. It is further submitted that on the request of Mr.Vinod Bhatia, husband of Mrs. Richa Bhatia-complainant, OP-3 arranged four air tickets for travel Delhi-Hongkong-Delhi through opposite party No. 2-M/s. Riya Travel & Tours Pvt. Ltd. At the time of issuing air tickets, all mandatory required passport details and contact addresses were provided, which are reproduced below:

Departure : DELHI- HONGKONG            AI-300 10/6/12

Arrival :      HONGKONG - DELHI           AI-317 15/6/12

1) Mrs. Richa Bhatia                Tkt No.       098-9552112714

2) Miss Ruhani Bhatia              Tkt No.       098-9552112719

3) Miss Shreya Bhatia              Tkt No.       098-9552112720

4) Mrs. Asha Bhalla                 Tkt No.       098-9552112721

25. The opposite party No. 3 states that the total cost of air tickets was Rs. 1,17,000/-. This amount was paid to OP-3 on 07/08/2012 through two cheques of Rs. 70,000/- and Rs. 47,000/- respectively.
26. The complainant states that on 04/05/2012 a mail was sent to OP3. OP-3 replied the mail received from Mr. Bhatia, husband of the complainant on 04-05-2012 stating "to check names and flight details and intimate ". It is further submitted by the Proprietor of OP-3 that he had to visit USA on 17.05.2012 to meet his daughter to share condolences because of death of his only son. The Proprietor of OP-3 submits that he was out of India; his office was closed during the period 15-5-2012 to 22-6-2012 and there was no staff working.
27. The OP-3 further argues that the complainant took independent decision to book and purchase fresh four air tickets through M/s. ALPINE Travels on 06/06/2012. The OP-3 further states that after arrival in India, he came to know that the complainant had to face inconvenience due to cancellation of flights by Air India and she purchased fresh air tickets on JET Airways since no alternate assistance/help was provided by Air India. Since no alternate arrangements were made by Air India, OP-3 requested M/s. Riya Travel & Tours Pvt. Ltd. to refund the total cost of air tickets. After making extensive efforts and visiting personally offices of Air India and M/s. Riya Travel & Tours Pvt. Ltd., OP-3 received the refund of air tickets. The total cost of air tickets amounting to Rs. 1,17,000/- was refunded in turn to the complainant/passengers vide statements of accounts for the months of July, 2012 and August, 2012 from the Indian Overseas Bank, enclosed without retaining single rupee towards handling charges.
28. The OP-3 submits that normally as per international travel rules, in such cases, when passengers physically report at the airport on the date of departure and that the flight has been cancelled, the operating airlines makes alternate arrangements and also provide hotel accommodation till departure, including transport, etc. Here in this case, the complainant without physically reporting for flight departure on 10/06/2012 at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, sent mail to Air India on 06/06/2012 for making alternate travel arrangements. When Mr. Bhatia was in Hongkong, he came to know on 04/06/2012 that Air India have cancelled the flight, immediately he should have contacted the office of Air India for alternate arrangement, but the complainant took independent decision to make alternate arrangements and purchased fresh four air tickets. The OP-3 provided best services before leaving India on 15/5/2012 and also arranged full refund immediately after arriving in India.
29. After going through the records and submissions of the parties, we are of the view that there is a deficiency in the services of the opposite parties. The complainant was made to run from pillar to post for no fault. The opposite parties, including the opposite party No. 1 has not dealtwith the grievances of the complainant professionally. No doubt, the amount of four tickets purchased through opposite party No. 3 was refunded to the complainant but for this the complainant was put at great stress and harassment and her family members had to suffer a lot of trauma and pain. The complainant had to purchase four tickets from a different agency at a very short notice but the opposite parties did not realize the anguish and pain of the complainant. We, therefore, direct that the opposite parties jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant for the mental agony and harassment within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Further a sum of Rs. 5,000/- be paid to the complainant towards litigation expenses, as prayed by her in the complaint. In case the opposite parties fail to pay the compensation within the stipulated period, the complainant shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum over the awarded amount from the date of purchase of air tickets till realization.

          A copy of order be sent to all the parties free of cost. The order be also uploaded in the website of the Commission (www.confonet.nic.in).

File be consigned to the record room along with a copy of the order.

[Poonam Chaudhry]

President

[Bariq Ahmad]                                                                                                                               [Shekhar Chandra]

    Member                                                                                                                                                   Member