D.O.F:01/07/2021

                                                                                                         D.O.O:20/09/2023

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES  REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KASARAGOD

CC.115/2021

Dated this, the 20^th day of September 2023

PRESENT:

SRI.KRISHNAN.K                          : PRESIDENT

SMT.BEENA.K.G                          : MEMBER

1. Nidheesh Vijayan, 27 years,

D/o. P.K Vijayan,

Palakkattu House, Shankarampady,

Chengala, Kasaragod – Taluk,              

Kasaragod District, 671541.

2. Nithya Vijayan,

D/o P.K. Vijayan, aged 29 years

Palakkattu House, Shankarampady,

Chengala, Kasaragod – Taluk,                                   : Complainants

Kasaragod District, 671541.

(Adv: T.C. Narayanan)

And

1. Ramesh. KG,

Proprietor, KG Tours and Travels,

Shivaganga House,

• Thankathadukkam

Karivedakam P.O

(Adv: Benny jose)

2. TATA SIA Airlines Ltd, regd Office,

Jeevan Bharati Tower – q, 10^th Floor,

124 Connaught Circus,

New Delhi 110001, India: Opposite Parties

3. TATA SIA Airlines Ltd. Corporate Office

Intellion Edge, Tower A, 9^th and 10^th Floor

South Peripheral Road,

Sector – 72, Gurugram, Haryana – 122101

(Adv: Baby P. Antony)

ORDER

SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT

     The complaint filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act

     The case of the complainant is that complainant No: 2 got an appointment as a Nurse in Ireland expected to report for written examination in a hospital at Dublin on 26/06/2021.  She booked air ticket through the travel against of Opposite Party No:1, flights are operated by Opposite Party No:1 and 3.  The Complainant No:1 paid the flight charges of Rs. 66150/- by digital money transfer .  Opposite Party No:1made representation that Visthara airlines is suitable for travel to Dublin. Opposite Party No:1 further represented that complainant could get connection flight of British Airways on reaching London on 11/06/2021 and could reach Dublin on 11/06/2021 at 14.36 hours.  He offered a ticket for Rs. 38,000/-.  Believing his representation London Airport, Complainant No:2 was not allowed to fly to British Airways on 11/06/2021.  Boarding pass was not issued to her to Dublin insisting quaratine period.  She knocked the door of Opposite parties especially Opposite Party No:1.  At last she was forced to return from London and reached to New Delhi.  She was forced to book ticket via KLM Royal Dutch Airlines in Air France.  She paid Rs. 66150/-.  She reached Dublin on 13/06/2021.  Later she came to know that Vistara Airlines is not operating any direct service to Dublin.  Ticket is booked without consent of complainant and there is deficiency in service unfair trade practice, loss in terms of money.  Complainant requested Opposite Party No:1 for refund of the ticket charges but rejected the claim without any reason.  The Opposite Party violated provisions of civil aviation section 3 dated 06/08/2010 effective from 01/08/2016.  Complainant sought compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- and pay Rs. 66,150/- additional ticket charges and cost of litigation.

          The Opposite Party No:1 filed a written version admitting issuance of the ticket, complainant says actual amount paid was Rs. 38,000/- cost of air ticket is 37798/-.  No inducement, no false representation and false promise was made by Opposite Party No:1 to complainant.  The complainant is silent regarding the reason for sending back.

3.     The Opposite Party No:2 and 3 filed a written version denying the allegations the Commission has no territorial jurisdiction to decide the dispute under section 13 of the conditions of carriage.  The complainant concealed material facts.  There is no cause of action for filing the complaint.

4.     The Opposite Party No:2 and 3 admits that the complainant booked the Air ticket from Cochin to Dublin on 04/06/2021  through  Opposite Party No:1 who is not the authorized agent of Opposite Party No:2 and 3 on 07/06/2021, notification regarding guidelines and mandatory quarantine requirements in UK was sent to the passenger via e-mail and SMS that the journey from London to Dublin to be under taken by the interline partner of Opposite Party No:2 and 3 on 11/06/2021 at 13.05 hours.  The official of London Airport asked the passengers to quarantine for 10 days in London or to leave London to New Delhi immediately.  Consequently, complainant returned London to New Delhi.  The complainant never approached Opposite Party No:2 and 3 for any assistance and therefore no case is made out against Opposite Party No:2 and 3 and therefore complainant is liable to be dismissed.  During the period of Covid -19 border measures guidelines were issued including testing and quarantine at the port of arrival from red list country.  She was stopped from London as per decision of the UK border force and therefore complaint may be dismissed.

5.  The complainant No:2 examined as Pw1.  The Opposite Party No:1 is examined as Dw1.  The screenshot of the whatsapp message is marked as Ext B1.  Travelling guidelines marked as Ext B2.

          Following points arise for consideration:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service, negligence or unfair trade practice from the part of Opposite Parties?
2. Whether complainant is entitled to any compensation? If so for what reliefs?

6.     The admitted case of both parties is that complainant booked the air ticket from Cochin to Dublin via London by paying the charges.  It is also admitted that complainant No: 2  could not travel from London to Dublin by using the air ticket issued by Opposite Party No:1.  The reason for denial of boarding pass from London according  to complainant is that she can fly only after quarantine in London for a particulars mandatory period.  The quarantine charges would cost around Rs. 30,000/- and she opted for return from London to Delhi.  She purchased air ticket through another airline by paying Rs. 61600/- .  and reached Dublin as scheduled without any delay in arrival or did not lose the opportunity to write Nurse examination.

7.      It is very pertinent to note that travel period comes within the covid – 19 period where the whole world was threatened with pandamic several countries were even stopped air travel for a continues period life of every citizens is in danger.  So many thousands lost their precious life.  The respective countries brought there own preventive measures to avoid further havoc.  It is not within the control of either an innocent travel agent Opposite Party No:1 who happen to issue ticket by collecting the correct charges within the control of airline operators to operate the flight as scheduled but all within the control of aviation authorities of respective government.  Here the passenger herself has no case that she has not received SMS or e-mail message sent by Opposite Party No:2 and 3, but according to be her, she herself opted her choice of returning back to Delhi and on her own wish and reached the destination, wrote examinations.

          In fact and truth, no pleadings or evidence by complainant as to what the deficiency in service or why negligence in a tribute to opposite parties nor unfair trade practice meted out by opposite parties either in the matter of failure to arrange the tickets or refusal to issue boarding pass or refusal to operate flight as scheduled or any other instances of negligent and committed by any of the opposite parties.

8.     Still complainant purchased the ticket for travel up to Dublin but she could fly with the ticket only up to London.  She suffered loss of charges paid by her for travel from London to Dublin.  Those who are not able to ply during covid period due to pandemic, they are entitled to refund of the flight charges for the route to which they could not fly.  Therefore Opposite Party No:2 and 3 are liable to return /refund air fare charges from London to Dublin fixed at Rs. 20,000/- after deducting charges from Kochi to London out of Rs. 38,000/-.

9.     When Corona virus started spreading across the country the scheduled International as well as domestic passengers flights were suspended a flight cancellation occurs when the airline does not operate the flight due to certain reason.  Thus if an airlines faith to inform the passenger about the cancellation of a flight within the certain period ie…. Minimum 2 weeks in advance the airlines in such a case must compensate the passenger.  The compensation amount depends on the travel provider regarding whether it in the airline or an online travel agent.

10.     As per the guidelines by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) a compensation of Rs. 5000/- is payable.

          If the flight tickets have been booked during the lockdown period though a travel agency in such cases, the full refund shall been given by the airlines.

          DGCA issued guidelines for refund of farers for the flights cancelled due to the Covid – 19 pandamic.  According to these guidelines the refund seekers were categorized in 3 specific categories.

          These guidelines were issued after the Supreme Court passed its judgement on this matter, the 3 rd category comprises of the passengers who have booked their flight anytime for travel after May 24 2020.  Under this category normal refund rules as per the Civil Aviation requirement (Rules) of DGCA will be applicable.

11.     The DGCA also issued an order to all Indian and Foreign airlines that all the state holders are instructed to ensure strict compliance.  The directions given by the Supreme Court.  Since despite filing, the complainant there is no favourable response from the Opposite Party No:2 and 3 by offering refund of ticket charger from London to Dublin.  In that extent there is deficiency in service by Opposite Party No:2 and 3.  They are liable to pay compensation and cost of litigation.  Considering the nature and circumstances of the case, compensation is estimated of Rs. 10,000/- payable by Opposite Party No:2 and 3 and cost of litigation fixed as Rs. 5000/-.

          In the result complaint is allowed in part directing Opposite Party No:2 and 3 to pay Rs. 20,000/- to complainant after deducting Rs. 18,000/- as charges  for Kochi to London out of Rs. 38,000/- collected as air fare up to Dublin.  Opposite Party No:2 and 3 are also directed to pay Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) for deficiency in service and Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of litigation within 30 days of the receipt of the order.  The Opposite Party No:1 is exonerated from liability since to collecting ticket charges credited to the account of Opposite Party No:2 and 3.

      Sd/-                                                                                               Sd/-

MEMBER                                                                                      PRESIDENT

Exhibits

A1- Flight e-Ticket Dt: 10/06/2021

A2- Air Ticket Dt: 13/06/2021

A3- Passport copy

A4 & A5 Series - Photostat copies of restrictions imposed by Civil Aviation Authority.

B1- Copy of the whatsapp Screenshot

B2- Copy of the flight ticket and travelling guidelines.

Witness Examined

Pw1- Nidheesh Vijayan

Dw1- Rejith. K.R

       Sd/-                                                                                     Sd/-

MEMBER                                                                            PRESIDENT

Forwarded by Order

                                                                      Assistant Registrar

Ps/