Punjab

Rupnagar

RBT/CC/18/274

Shavata Vohra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Saggar World Holidays - Opp.Party(s)

Hari Om Jindal adv

23 Aug 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CAMP COURT AT LUDHIANA

 

Received by way of transfer Consumer Complaint No.274 of 2018

                                           Date of institution: 30.04.2018

                                               Date of Decision: 23.08.2022

 

 

1. Shaveta Vohra daughter of Sh. Vijay Vohra
2. Vijay Vohra son of Shri Ram Lal Vohra
3. Renu Vohra wife of Sh. Vijay Vohra

All residents of 1761, Phase I, Urban Estate, Dugri, Ludhiana, 141002.

…….Complainant

Versus

 

1. Sagger World Holiday, Model Town Road, Opposite White House, Ludhiana, through its Proprietor/Partner/authorized signatory
2. Etihad Airways, 2^nd Floor, Narain Manzil, 23, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001, through its Manager/Account Manager/ Authorized signatory
3. Etihad Airways, Ist Floor, Sunder Mahal, 141, Marine Drive, Mumbai-400020,throughitsManager/Administrator/authorized signatory   
4.   Etihad Airways, Head Office at New Airport Road, Khalifa City A, PO Box 35566, Abu Dhabi, UAE through its Director/Managing Director

                                                          ……..Opposite Parties

 QUORUM:   

  HON’BLE MR. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT.

                   HON’BLE MRS. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

 

PRESENT:

      

Sh. Hari Om Jindal, Adv. counsel for complainant

OP No.1 exparte

Sh.Iqbal Singh, Adv. For OPs No.2 to 4

              
 

ORDER

RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint filed under Consumer Protection Act at Ludhiana, and transferred the same to District Consumer Commission, Ropar, by the complainant against the Opposite Parties on the ground that the OP NO.1 is engaged in the business of selling Air Tickets of the OPs No.2 to 4 and the OP NOs No.2 & 3 are engaged in the business of Air Flights and are having the Branch Offices of OP No.4 in India and the OP No.4 is the head office at Dubai (UAE). The complainants had planned to go abroad i.e. New York and Buffalo. As per the booking, the complainants had to go firstly at Abu Dhabi on 18.08.2017 and had to come back from Buffalo to New York on 21.08.2017 and Abu Dhabi to New Delhi, India on 30.08.2017. The complainants had planned to go there according to above schedule and purchased the Air Tickets from OP No.1. The OP No.1 got booked the air tickets of OPs No.2 to 4 i.e. Etihad Airways for the New York and for Buffalo, the OPs booked the air tickets of Jetblue Airways and for the said tickets, the Ops charged Rs.98,494/- per person. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.1,42,000/- by cheques from their bank account and Rs.1,53,482/- in cash to the OP No.1. As per the above said schedule, the complainant got pre booked the rooms for stay in the hotels at New York and Buffalo. As per the trip plan as well as pre booking of return air tickets of OPs No.2 to 4 , the complainants had to reach at Buffalo on 18.8.2017. After staying for three days at Buffalo, the complainants had to depart from Buffalo for New York on 21.08.2017.  As per the trip plan, the complainants after staying for seven days at New York, had to return back at New Delhi through Abu Dhabi. But on 18.8.2017, due to some reason, the flight for buffalo was cancelled by Jetblue Airways and the complainants could not travel to buffalo. As the flights were cancelled by Jetblue Airways and there was no fault on the part of the complainants, as such they were duty bound to provide accommodation to the complainants i.e. its passengers, but neither OPs No.2 to 4 nor Jetblue Airways provided any accommodation or any meal to the complainants. The employee of OPs No.2 to 4 as well as the Jetblue Airways lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other with regard to accommodation or flight for buffalo and the made the complainants to wait at New York Airport till 2 AM. Thereafter the employee of OPs as well as Jetblue Airways refused to provide any accommodation or any further flight for the buffalo. As such, the complainant had to arrange the accommodation on their own on urgent basis. As the flights were cancelled, as there was no room available in the hotel at New York but as the complainants had pre booking of Hudson Hotel at New York for 21.8.2017 onwards, as such they approached to their hotel to accommodate them due to cancellation of flight for 18.8.2017 onwards and the refusal of the Ops to provide any accommodation. The employee of the Hudson Hotel charged extra amount for their pre arrival in the hotel. As the flights of the complainants were cancelled for buffalo for 18.8.2017, as such, the complainants lodged the complaint to Jetblue Airways as well as Etihad Airways for refund of their two way airfare i.e. New York to Buffalo and Buffalo to New York. The Ops did not provide any accommodation to the complainant, rather they also lost the luggage of the complainants and in this regard also, the complainant No.1 lodged a complaint to the Ops. Due to the negligent Act and conduct of the Ops, the complainants were constrained to purchase new clothing and other materials. It is further alleged that on 20.08.2017, after more than 48 hours of the lost of luggage of the complainants, Jetblue Airways provided the luggage to the complainants, but the bag of the complainants were damaged by them. The complainants also lodged a complaint in this regard, however the Ops paid an amount of a very meager amount as compensation to the complainants. As the flights of the complainants were cancelled, the complainants could not travel to buffalo and they had to stay at New York, as such, they had borne 724.56 Dollars during their stay for three days and 600 dollars for their clothing etc and 600 dollars for their food. Due to the negligent act and conduct of the Ops, the whole trip of the complainants became like a nightmare dream. The complainants lodged the complaint for the refund. Jetblue Airways sent an email in this regard on 31.08.2017 to the Ops, in which they duly acknowledged that the flight was cancelled and the customers i.e. passengers were not accommodated and process for the refund of ticket, but the Ops sent emails to each other regarding the claim of the complainants with regard to UDF, but thereafter they realized about their negligence/mistake and lodged the claim of the complainants in correct way i.e. regarding unused sector. The Ops sent an email to their team regarding the cancellation of flights for B6 and duly mentioned that the passengers i.e. the complainants were not accommodated and they had got the approval for the refund of unused sector and also provided the waiver code, but inspite of that the Ops did not make the refund to the complainants. On 20.09.2017 at 3.39 PM Neha Bhogal sent an email to Bhawna i.e. Sales Support north and East India, Etihad for the refund of the amount and at 3.58 PM, Bhawna sent an email to Sumit Teji of Etihad for the refund of the complainants. But the Ops intentionally and deliberately lingered on the matter on one pretext or the other. On 24.11.2017, inspite of confirmation regarding cancellation of flights and not providing accommodation to the complainants by Jetblue Airways as well as other internal correspondences of the OP between each other, the Ops in order to harass the complainants denied the refund vide their email dated 24.11.2017 at 1.18 PM. However, the Ops did not finrom regarding the cancellation of the refund of the complainants. The complainants kept on waiting for the response of the Ops and when they did not receive any response from the Ops, the complainants approached the OP No.1 to know about the status of their refund, then it came to the knowledge of the complainants that they denied the refund of the complainants. The complainants again sent an email to the Ops on 10.04.2018 at 12.09.PM And again requested for the refund of the amount and also sent previous emails by the Ops to each other and to others. On 17.4.2018, the OP No.3 sent an email to the complainant No.1 that they have already refunded three tickets, however, the complainant never received any alleged refund amount. On 18.04.2018, the complainant No.1 approached to OP No.1 to know about the status of the purported refunded amount, but to the utmost shock and surprise of the complainants that the employees of the OP No.1 informed that they have not received any such amount. The complainant No.1 again sent email at 4.22 Pm to the Ops No.2 to 4 in this regard. On 19.04.2018 at 10.56, the Ops No.2 to 4 sent an email to the complainant No.1 that Rs.440/- per guest has been refunded and told to contract OP No.1. On 20.04.2018, the complainant No.1 against sent an email to the Ops and claimed the refund of two way fares, as the amount refunded by the Ops is very less than the actual amount paid to the Ops i.e. Rs.98,494/- per person. On 23.4.2018, the complainant No.1 again sent an email to the Ops and demanded the break up of the tickets, but the Ops intentionally and deliberately did not provide any break up till today. It is further alleged, the Ops cancelled the flights of the complainants from New York to Buffalo and thereafter, they neither provided any other flight nor provided the accommodation to the complainants and the complainant had to make their arrangement at their own. Thereafter, the Ops delayed the luggage of the complainants for three days and when returned, same was in damaged condition. Due to the negligent act, conduct and behavior of the Ops, the complainants have borne additional expenses of their stay at new York from 18.8.2017 to 21.08.2017 and due to their negligent act and conduct, unfair trade practice, the whole trip of the complainants was destroyed and the complainants could not enjoy their trip and suffered a lot of harassment, inconvenience, pain and agony and also suffered monetary loss. Vide this instant complaint, the complainants sought the following reliefs against the OPs.:-

1. To refund the ½ amount of air tickets from New York to Buffalo and Buffalo to New York i.e. Rs.49,247/- per person i.e. total Rs.1,47,741/- to the complainants.
2. To refund the payment of Rs.1,28,630/- i.e. 1924.56 US dollars X Rs.66.84/- i.e. todays price of US Dollars for spending the amount during their stay at new York due to above said act of the Ops.
3. To refund the amount of 1000 US Dollars i.e. 200 dollar each luggage, for causing delay in delivery of luggage.
4. To pay Rs.3,00,000/- as damages for causing inconvenience, harassment, mental pain and agony on the account of negligence and gross deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.
5. To pay Rs.11,000/- as cost of complaint.

2.       Upon notice, the OPs No.2 to 4 have filed written reply taking preliminary objections; that this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint; that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint. On merits, it is stated that neither the Ops No.2 to 4 reside in Ludhiana nor do they have an office in Ludhiana moreover no cause of action has arisen at Ludhiana. Nothwithstanding the fact that the complainants have not produced any document to establish the jurisdiction of this Commission. The jurisdiction against an airline is required to be decided in accordance with the provisions of the Carriage by Air Act, 1972 and that jurisdiction in case of carriage by air is governed by Rule 33 of Schedule III of the Carriage by Air Act, 1972. Hence, an action can be brought only at either the place of destination or where the Carrier is domiciled or has its principal place of business or where the carrier has a place of business through which the contract has been made, which in this case would be either New Delhi or New York as Eithad Airways, Ops No.2 to 4 is not domiciled at Ludhiana nor to OPS No.2 to 4 have their principal place of business at Ludhiana. The destination of the complainants was not Ludhiana and the Ops No.2 to 4 also do not have an establishment at Ludhiana through which the alleged contract of travel was made. Moreover, in the present case, it cannot even be said the any part of cause of action has arisen at Ludhiana as Ludhiana was not even on the itinerary of the complainants, who flew from New Delhi to New York via Abu Dhabi and returned to New Delhi Via Abu Dhabi. Thus, alleging no deficiency in service on the part of the answering Ops and prayed for dismissal the complaint with cost.

3.     In support of the complaint, the complainant has tendered various documents. On the other hand, the OPs also tendered certain documents in support of their version.

4.     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.

5.     From the perusal of the documents submitted and averments of the complaint, it is writ-large on the file that the OPs has intentionally and deliberately paying the claim amount to the complainants. Due to the act and conduct of the OPs, the complainant suffered mental as well as monetary loss. Due to negligent act and conduct of the OPs, the complainants purchased new clothings and other materials. The complainants received their luggage in damaged condition after 48 hours. Due to cancellation of the flight, the complainants have no option to stay at New York and they had borne 724.56 dollars during their stay for three days and 600 dollars had spent for their food. The complainants sent many request through email to the Ops for claiming their amount but OPs has failed to do so.  

10.     In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint with the following directions to the OPs:-

1. To refund the amount of Rs. 2,95,482/- air tickets charges from New York to Buffalo and Buffalo to New York  to the complainants along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of cancellation of the flight.

2. To refund the payment of Rs.1,28,630/- i.e. 1924.56 US Dollars X

 Rs.66.84 i.e. at the time of that incident (price of US Dollar), for spending the amount during their stay at New York.

3. To refund the amount of Rs.1000 dollars i.e. 200 dollar each luggage, for causing delay in delivery of luggage

4. To pay Rs.50,    000/- as compensation

5. To pay Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses.

The OPS are further directed to comply with the said order within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.  Free certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be sent back to the District Commission, Ludhiana, for consigning the same to the Record Room.

•  

August 23, 2022

(Ranjit Singh)

                                                                                                  PRESIDENT

 

 

( Ranvir Kaur)

MEMBER