Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/61/2021

Make My Trip India Pvt. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Rajat Sharma - Opp.Party(s)

Nitin Bhasin

08 Jun 2022

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

 

Appeal No.	61 of 2021
Date of Institution	18.08.2021
Date of Decision	08.06.2022

Make My Trip (India) Pvt. Limited, Building No.5, Tower B, 19^th Floor, Building No.5 (EPITOM), DLF Cyber City, Phase-3, Gurugram-122002, Haryana.

                                                                          …..Appellant/Opposite Party No.1

Versus

1. Rajat Sharma, R/o House No.95, Top Floor, Sector 28-A, Chandigarh, Union Territory – 160002.
2. Prachi Sharma, R/o House No.95, Top Floor, Sector 28-A, Chandigarh, Union Territory – 160002.
3. Riya Sharma, Through their natural & Legal guardian father Rajat Sharma R/o House No.95, Top Floor, Sector 28-A, Chandigarh, Union Territory – 160002.
4. Atharv Sharma, Through their natural & Legal guardian father Rajat Sharma, R/o House No.95, Top Floor, Sector 28-A, Chandigarh, Union Territory – 160002.
5.  

BEFORE:  JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                 MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                 MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER

               

Argued by: Sh. Gaurav Rana, Advocate for the appellant.

                 Sh. Satyendra Kumar, Advocate for the respondents No.1 to 4.

Respondent No.5 (exparte vide order dated 25.11.2021).

                       

PER PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

              This appeal is directed against an order dated 10.05.2021, rendered by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II (now District Commission-II), U.T., Chandigarh (in the short ‘the District Commission’ only), vide which, it allowed the Consumer Complaint against Opposite Party No.1, with the following directions: -

“11. Taking into account the above discussion & findings the deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1 has been proved. Therefore, the present complaint is allowed against OP No.1 with direction to refund an amount of Rs.29,080/- to the complainant (the cost of return air-tickets) and also to pay a compository amount of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for causing mental & physical harassment including litigation expenses.

However, the OP No.1 may got all necessary documents/vouchers signed from the complainant(s) enabling it to get & retain the refund of the cancelled air-tickets in question pertaining to complainants, as and when received by it per order of Hon’ble NCLT.

This order shall be complied with by the OP No.1 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which it shall also be liable to pay additional cost of Rs.10,000/-apart from above relief.”

2. The facts, in brief, are that the complainants had booked return air- ticket dated 13.03.2019 for travelling from Chandigarh to Bagdogra and Bagdogra to Chandigarh (to and fro) from the website/web-portal of Opposite Party No.1 as per booking details given in para 3 of the complaint. It was stated that the booking was confirmed after payment of Rs.51,688/- including convenience charges for return air travel, copy of tax invoice dated 13.03.2019 and e-ticket dated 06.06.2019 is Annexure C-1 (colly).  It was further stated that the grievance of the complainant is that JET Airways flight from Bagdogra to Chandigarh dated 14.06.2019 was cancelled without prior notice and without assigning any reason and neither alternative arrangements were made by the Opposite Parties for the return travel despite repeated requests made by the complainants nor any refund was made to the complainants thereby causing financial loss and harassments to them. It was further stated that the complainants eventually had to book another flight for their return by paying additional amount of Rs.36,469/- including convenience charges, copy of tax invoice dated 19.04.2019 and e-ticket dated 14.06.2019 are Annexure C-2 (colly). It was further stated that when the Opposite Party No.1 did not refund their money, a legal notice dated 18.7.2019 was sent which was replied   vide letter dated 27.08.2019 wherein the liability was shifted on the Airline company i.e. Jet Airways which has become defunct and is under insolvency proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench.  It was further stated that till date the complainants have not been refunded their money by the Opposite Parties.  It was further stated that the aforesaid act of the Opposite Parties, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. When the grievance of the complainants, were not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint, was filed.
3. The Opposite Party No.1 filed its reply and admitted the factual matrix of the case and stated the complaint is not maintainable against it, as the liability of Opposite Party No.1, is to the extent of booking of the ticket and once the confirmed ticket is issued to the complainants, the Opposite Party No.1 is discharged from its obligation and duties qua the said booking. It was further stated that at the time of bookings the complainants duly agreed to the terms and conditions of the ‘User Agreement’ wherein it was mentioned that in case of cancellation of flight, it is the liability of the Airlines to refund the amount and it is duly mentioned in the guidelines issued by the DGCA.   It was further stated that the though the Opposite Party No.1 has initiated the refund process on behalf of the complainant and the same has been forwarded to the concerned Airlines and the concerned Airlines is to refund or reschedule the ticket or bookings in lieu of charges duly agreed upon at the time of making bookings.  It was further stated that the complainants are governed by the cancellation and refund policy of the concerned Airlines, which prevails over the terms and conditions of the Opposite Party No.1 in case of any conflict as per the cancellation policy. It was further stated that there is no deficiency in service on its part, and the Opposite Party No.1 had prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. Notice of the complaint was sent to the Opposite Party No.2 seeking its version of the case, but none appeared on behalf of Opposite Party No.2 despite service, therefore, it was proceeded ex-parte.
5. The parties led evidence, in support of their case.
6. After hearing the Counsel for the Parties, and, on going through the evidence, and record of the case, the District Commission, allowed the complaint against the Opposite Party No.1, as stated above.
7. Feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal, has been filed by the Opposite Party No.1.
8. We have heard the Counsel for the Parties and have gone through the evidence, and record of the case, carefully.
9. After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the contentions, advanced by the Counsel for the Parties, and the evidence, on record, we are of the considered opinion, that the appeal is liable to be dismissed, for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter.
10. On going through the records of the learned District Commission, it is observed that the appellant  i.e. Makemy Trip India Pvt. Ltd. has failed to discharge its obligation of providing due services to the respondents even after receiving the convenience fee, as is evident from the air tickets. It is further observed that the appellant neither provided nor made any alternative arrangement for the return journey of the respondents against the confirmed booking for 14.06.2019 made through them almost three months prior, nor they timely applied for the refund from the concerned airline. It is further observed that after passing of the order dated 20.06.2019 by the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) vide which Jet Airways has been placed into bankruptcy protection, the appellant company filed customer claims including that of the respondents for refund of the amount of confirmed air tickets for 14.06.2019, forcing this Commission to believe that the appellant company who is in active sector of air ticket booking, was very well in the knowledge about the ongoing insolvency proceedings of Jet Airways, but still it did not act swiftly to mitigate the loss to the respondents.
11. Therefore, this Commission feels that the order passed by the learned District Commission does not suffer from any illegality and this Commission is inclined to fall in line with the decision of the District Commission and accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed.
12. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed, with no order as to costs. The order of the District Commission is upheld.
13. Consequently, Miscellaneous Application No.578 of 2021 for staying the operation of the impugned order dated 10.05.2021 also stands dismissed, having been rendered infructuous.
14. Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.
15. The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

 

 

Pronounced.

08.06.2022

 

                                                             Sd/-              

                         [JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI]

PRESIDENT

                                                               

                                                                          Sd/-

[PADMA PANDEY]

MEMBER

 

                                                                             Sd/-

                                                                      [RAJESH K. ARYA]

 MEMBER

Gp