Date of Filing: 12-03-2015
Date of Order: 21-01-2019
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD
P r e s e n t
HON’BLE Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B. PRESIDENT.
HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER
Monday, the 21st day of January, 2019
C.C.No.339 /2015
Between
Dr.Nandhri Sai Prasant, S/o.Late.N.Sriramarao,
Hindu, aged about 69 years, Doctor,
R/o.Flat No.403, Lotus Gagan Vihar,
Gagan Mahal Colony, Hyderabad ……Complainant
And
The Chief Officer,
M/s. IBIBO Group Private Limited,
4th floor, Pearl Towers,
Plot No.51, Sector-32,
Gurgaon, Haryana – 122002 ….Opposite Party
Counsel for the complainant : Sri K.V.Subrahmanya Narusu
Counsel for the Opposite Party : M/s. M.V.R.Suresh & Associates
.
O R D E R
(By Sri P. Vijender, B.Sc., LL.B., President on behalf of the bench)
This complaint is preferred under Section 12 of C.P. Act of 1986 for a direction to the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for causing mental agony and physical suffering by deficiency of service.
- The complainant’s case in brief is that opposite party is engaged in online travelling and booking of hotels, air tickets etc with its office at Gurgaon in the State of Haryana. The complainant has booked four tickets through the opposite party to travel from Hyderabad to Kochi and back ward journey was on 16-11-2014 and back journey were scheduled on 22-11-2014. All the four persons for whom the complainant booked travel tickets online are senior citizens and two of them are reputed practicing doctors who have been given appointments to their patients on 23-11-2014.
The journey on 16-11-2014 from Hyderarbad to Kochi was eventful and went off as per schedule. After having spent holidays as well as pilgrimage have to returned back to Kochi on 21-11-2014 evening hours and were supposed to catch flight back to Hyderabad on 22-11-2014 with scheduled departure time at 11.05A.M. At about 11.40P.M on 21-11-2014 the complainant and co-travelers received a phone call to mobile enquired about his identity and after informing the same the customer care of the opposite party informed that scheduled flight S.G108 to depart at 11.05A.M on 22-11-2014 was cancelled and immediately complainant repeatedly asked for alternative avenues for which the caller of the phone expressed his helplessness and informed that entire booking amount will be refunded and stating so disconnected the call. The efforts made by the complainant to call back the caller and contact him resulted in vain. Immediately the complainant made a call to his son at Hyderabad in the odd hours and explained the entire episode and asked to book next available flight to depart on 22-11-2014. Accordingly the complainant’s son had booked 4 tickets for Indigo flight on night of 21-11-2014.
As per the booking for Indigo flight to travel from Kochi Airport on 22-11-2014 they arrived at airport and to their surprise noticed that the schedule flight of Spicejet SG108 for which they have booked for return journey was flying as per schedule was not cancelled as informed to them by from the customer care over the phone on the previous night. Left with no alternative the complainant and co travelers have cancelled the tickets booked for Indigo flight and in the process have sustained loss of Rs.6,000/- towards cancellation charges and travelled by in Spice jet and reached Hyderabad.
Soon after reaching the Hyderabad the complainant tried to his level best to contact the opposite party over phone number of times but it resulting in vain. As he could not get proper connection on phone left with no alternative the complainant had sent notice by registered post with acknowledgment due on 25-11-2014 with enclosures but it was returned with an endorsement as addressee refused to take. Then the complainant sent a mail narrating his experience and having received it the opposite party neither replied nor acted positively. Then the complainant got issued a legal notice on 24-12-2014 and same was returned with an endorsement with an addressee refused to receive. The actions of opposite party informing through the customer care about the cancellation schedule of Spicejet fight resulted not only physical and mental suffering but also financial loss and It amounts cheating and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party hence, the present complaint for the aforesaid relief.
- Opposite party filed written version originally on 29-09-2015 and additional one on 20-1-2016. In above written version’s it denied the allegations of the deficiency of service. Substance of defence taken in both written versions as is as under:
The opposite party Private Limited Ibibo in the business of online travel portal with its website offering complete travel solutions with corporate office at Gurgaon, Haryana State. Its website is leading business to consumer online travel aggregator providing bookings of flights both domestic and International, hotels, buses and holiday packages. It is rightly carved a niche for itself and is acclaimed for its reputation and quality of service. The complainant has booked to and fro air tickets from Hyderabad to Kochi through its website to travel by Spice jet. The flights were scheduled on 16-11-2014 from Hyderabad to Kochi and on 22-11-2014 from Kochi to Hyderabad. The opposite party is only facilitator for booking online tickets provided by various airline operators. In the present case air tickets were provided by the operator of Spicejet. It is not the aviation company or the carrier. It has no control over operation, non-operation or cancellation of flights . In case of cancellation of air tickets it is incumbent of the complainant to inform the same to the opposite party in order to process the refund of the fare in terms and conditions and it cannot be held liable for cancellation of flights by operator of flights. The opposite party in its due course of business receives flight information and its operation schedule from its officials and inturn will communicate the same to its customers. In the instant case it has received email on 21-11-2014 at 5.50PM from the officials of the Spice Jet mentioning the list of cancelled flights schedule to flight from 22nd November, 2014 to 25-11-2014. On the basis of said mail from the Spice jet the customer care team of the opposite party called the complainant and informed him about the cancellation of the scheduled Spice jet on 21-11-2014. It was specifically informed to the complainant by the customer care of opposite party that the entire amount paid by him towards tickets fare will be refunded in due course. The opposite party was also under impression that the scheduled flight of the Spice jet on 21-11-2014 was cancelled by the operator and it cannot be blamed for any wrong information provided by the airline operator.
The complainant has booked airline tickets of Spicejet through opposite party which is only a facilitator for reservation of flight tickets. It has no control over the operation, non-operation or cancellation of flights. Air tickets have been provided by the flight operators Spice jet and information about the cancellation schedule flight on 22-11-2014 was received from the flight operator and if any inconvenience or loss was caused to the complainant on account of the said information the remedy for the complainant to proceed against the operator the Spicejet. Hence Airline operator of Spice jet is the proper and necessary party to the present complaint and for non-joinder of it the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant does not fall within the definition of consumer so as to maintained the complaint before this Forum. Similarly the office of the opposite party is situate in the State of Haryana so no part of cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. Hence for all these reasons the complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.
In the enquiry stage the complainant filed his evidence affidavit reiterating the substance of the complaint and he also got exhibited four (4) documents. Similarly for the Opposite Party evidence affidavit of Sri Akshat Sulalit stated to be it’s Sr. Manager –legal is filed and also got exhibited B1document. Opposite party filed written arguments. Complainant filed a memo stating that the pleadings in the complaint may be treated as written arguments .
On a consideration of material available on the record the following points have emerged for consideration .
- Whether the complainant could make out a case of deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party and in consequences of it and compensation is liable to be paid to him?
- To what relief?
Point No.1: The first and foremost objection taken by the opposite party is the complainant is not a consumer within the definition of service as provided under the C.P.Act. Even according to the opposite party it is the facilitator for booking of flight tickets online with its website. The complainant availed services of opposite party for booking the flight tickets through it. Any person availing services will come within the definition of Consumer as defined under the Act. The next objection taken by the opposite party is no part of cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Forum to maintain the present complaint because the office of the opposite party is situate in Gurgaon of Haryana state and it has no branch office in the city of Hyderabad. But this defense also has no legs to stand because admittedly the complainant booked the tickets online from Hyderabad through the website of opposite party and he boarded the flight at Hyderabad and for return journey he was expected to come to Hyderabad only. The very booking of flight tickets by using website of opposite party at Hyderabad gives a cause of action to file a consumer complaint. As such both these grounds urged by the opposite party have no force to sustain.
As rightly pleaded by the opposite party it is only facilitator of booking of flight through its website online and it has no control over the Flight cancellation or operation hence whatever loss or sufferance of the complainant is an account of alleged information with regard to the cancellation of Spice Jet flight through which he was expected to travel from kochi to Hyderabad. Hence the deficiency of service is only on the part of the Airlines operator not a facilitator for booking of the tickets. In the present case by way of additional written version the opposite party has come up the version that it received an email on 21-11-2014 at 5.50 P.M from the officials of the Spice jet with a list of cancelled flights scheduled to fly from 22-11-2014 to 25-11-2014. Basing on the said email information from the officials of Spice Jet it has passed on the same to its customers who have been booked the flight tickets to travel by Spice jet during the period from 22-11-2014 to 25-11-2014. In evidence of it the opposite party has filed the list of cancelled flights received from it by Spice jet. Truth or otherwise this list is not disputed by the complainant. By a close reading of Ex.B1 shows intimation received by the opposite party with regard to cancellation of the flights operated by Spice Jet during the 22-11-2014 to 25-11-2014. The scheduled flight by which the complainant and his co-travelers were to travel from Cochin to Hyderabad on 22-11-2014 comes within this period. It was incumbent upon the opposite party to communicate to its customers about the information received by it from the officials of Spice Jet and for that reason only the complainant was informed by customer care of opposite party about the cancellation of the flight schedule on 22-11-2014. Even after filing of Ex.B1 document the complainant has not made efforts to implead the flight operator of Spice jet as party and no reasons are given for it. According to the complainant himself he was constrained to book tickets from the other operator to travel on account of information received about the cancellation of the scheduled Spice Jet flight. But infact this cancelled flight stated to have taken off as scheduled. The information sent by the officials of Spice jet operator to the opposite party furnishing the list of cancelled flight during period from 22-11-2014 to 25-11-2014 has been proved by opposite party, as such the remedy for the complainant is to proceed against the flight operator of the Spice jet but not the complainant. Thus there was no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party as it was bound to pass on the information received to its customers as facilitator for booking of flight through it. As rightly pleaded by the opposite party the present complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary party i.,e the operator of the Spice Jet. The complainant could not make out a case of deficiency of service by the opposite party to maintain the present complaint. For aforesaid reasons the point is answered against the complainant.
Point No.3: In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Dictated to steno transcribed and typed by her pronounced by us on this the 21st day of January , 2019
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
PW1 DW1
Dr.N.S.Prashanth Sri Akshat Sulalit
Exhibits filed on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A1 is legal notice issued to respondent dated 24-12-2014
Ex.A2 is registered post returned cover letter
Ex.A3 is Flight tickets
Ex.A4 is also registered post returned cover letter
Exhibits filed on behalf of the Opposite party
Ex.B1 is list of cancellation of flights
MEMBER PRESIDENT
