Delhi

New Delhi

CC/418/2013

Akhil B Gupta - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Emirates Airways - Opp.Party(s)

20 Jan 2020

ORDER

 

 

 

                                                      CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

                                                          (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

                               NEW DELHI-110001

 

 

Case No.C.C./418/2013                                                  Dated:

                  R.B./07/2019

 

          In the matter of:

1.        Akhil B Gupta &
2.        Ashima Gupta

D/5/13, DLF-1, Gurgaon-122002 …… Complainants

       

Versus

Fly Mantra.com

E 160,Sector-63

Noida.                                                                                              …….Opposite Party

 

MEMBER – H.M. VYAS

ORDER

            This is case where the complaint bearing no. 418/2013 was filed before this Forum. The order passed by the Predecessor Bench of this Forum were assailed before the Hon’ble State Commission and the Hon’ble State Commission vide order dated 18/03/2019 in FA 86/2015 set aside the orders dated 04/04/2014 and 12/01/2015 passed by the predecessor bench the matter was remanded back to this Forum to proceed further in accordance with law.

The Hon’ble State Commission directed the parties to appear before this Forum on 08/05/2019.

In the complaint there were four OPs namely OP-1 Emirates Airways, OP-2 Riya Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd., OP-3 Fly Mantra.com and OP-4 Flying Mates.com. The complainant filed an application on 15/01/20 praying to delete the OP-1 Emirates Airways, OP-2 Riya Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd. and OP-4 Flying Mates.com from the Memorandum of opposite party.

The said application was allowed. The evidence by way of affidavit already filed by the complainant and OP-3. Thereafter the complainant and the counsel of OP-3 addressed final arguments and concluded.

The facts of the case is contended by the complainant  are that the complainant purchased two confirmed return tickets  in the name of Ms. Ashima Gupta and Mr. Richie Demorco of the fight from San Francisco to Delhi against payment of Rs. 01,39,850/- from the OP-4. It is stated that the OP-3 Fly Mantra.com cancelled the ticket as informed by OP-1 because of some inter-se and private differences between the OPs. It is stated that the OP-3 also issued undated letter confirming cancellation which reads as under:-

 

                                    To whom so ever it may concern

 “We have done a booking for Mrs. Ashima Gupta and Richie Demarco on 10/11/2012 Ticket# 176 2631107207 and # 176 2631107208. The booking was made for out travel agent M/s Flyingmates.com. Since the payment for above ticket was not made till 3^rd of January by Flyingmates.com after constant reminders and follow ups, as per the agreement we have processed the cancellation for the same to recover our money. Agreement is also attached with the letter”

                                                                                          Regards

                                                                                    Navdeep Munjal

 

Since, all the other OPs have been deleted from the array of parties therefore the contention and submissions of the OP-3 fly Mantra being relevant have been taken into consideration. The evidence of the complainant and OP-3 Fly Mantra.com is on record. Both the parties have addressed arguments.

The main contention of the complainant is that the amount was paid to OP-4, however, the booking of tickets was cancelled by OP-3 even after receipt of the due amount. Reference has been made to some statement starting from 17/01/2012 to 28/10/2010 stated to be from the account book of the OP-4- fly mates. Relying on the same the complainant contends that the amount in respect of ticket cost stood paid by OP-4 (Fly Mates) to OP-3 Fly Mantra.com. It is alleged that the OP-3 had no authority to cancel the complainant’s ticket and as such it is solely liable for deficiency in services and the harassment caused to the complainant.

 

Per contra, it is argued on behalf of OP-3 and the complainant made the payment to OP-4 and not to OP-3 to purchase 2 tickets in the name of Ms. Ashima Gupta and Mr. Richie Demorco. It is stated that the OP-3 booked the tickets for OP-4 and since the entire amount from OP-4 was not received, therefore, the tickets were cancelled. Reference has also been made to the emails sent to OP-4 by OP-3 about non-receipt of the outstanding amount from the OP-4 while simultaneously conveying that the tickets would be cancelled on this account.

It is also argued on behalf of OP-3 that the first complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint as neither he is consumer nor paid any consideration to seek services from OP-3. Whatever claim, the complainant can raise could only be against the OP from whom he purchased the tickets and paid against thereof.

OP-3 argued that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the OP-3 and as such the complaint is liable to be dismissed being false frivolous so far as the allegations made against OP-3 are concerned.

We have given due consideration to the material placed before us and the submission made by the parties. The undisputed facts are that 2 tickets in the name of Ms. Ashima Gupta and Mr. Richie Demorco were purchased from fly Mantra-OP-4 and paid a sum of Rs. 13,9,850/-. The complainants prayer to delete the OP-1,2&4 has already been allowed. The flight information filed by the complainant were issued by OP-4 and an invoice for the amount of Rs. 13,9,850/-  has also been filed.

In these circumstances since except OP-3 all other OPs have been deleted from the array of parties. Thus, the complainant prayer to refund the amount of Rs. 13,9,850/- and compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- survives against OP-3 only for adjudication. The letter issued by the OP-3 is about non-payment of dues by OP-4 and speaks about cancellation of the tickets booked by OP-3for OP-4 (deleted from array of parties). We therefore, do not find any substantiating document which could show any issue of providing services by OP-3 to the complainant or having received any consideration from the complainant especially regarding the purchase of air ticket.

In view of above facts and discussions we hold that the complainant no. 1 is not a consumer within the definition of “Consumer” under Consumer Protection Act, since availed no services nor paid any consideration/cost of air ticket qua the OP-3 i.e. Fly Mantra. Secondly, we hold that there is no privity of contract between the complainant and the fly mantra i.e. OP-3. Neither the cost of air ticket was paid to OP-3- fly mantra nor the ticket in the name of complainants were issued by fly mantra.

We therefore do not find any deficiency in services on the part of fly mantra-OP-3. The complaint is dismissed being without merit.

A copy of this order each be sent to each party free of cost by post as per statutory requirement.

Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in.

File be consigned to record room.

Pronounced in open Forum on 20/01/2020.

 

 

                                                       (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                                                                 PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                                                      (H M VYAS)

            MEMBER                                                                                               MEMBER