SH. VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL filed a consumer case on 16 May 2024 against SPICE JET AIRLINE LTD. in the North East Consumer Court. The case no is RBT/CC/98/2024 and the judgment uploaded on 21 May 2024.
Delhi
North East
RBT/CC/98/2024
SH. VIJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL - Complainant(s)
Versus
SPICE JET AIRLINE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)
16 May 2024
ORDER
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST
The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer protection Act, 2019.
The case of the Complainant is that sister of Complainant died on 21 August and rituals were supposed to perform on 24 August. In order to reach on time,the Complainant had booked ticket for himself and his family members from Varanasi to Delhi from Spicejet Airlines SG 2773 on 21 August only whose departure was at 11.30 am arrival 1.25 pm on 24 August. On 23 August in the evening Complainant was informed by a message/email that Varanasi to Delhi has been cancelled/rescheduled. Thereafter,Complainant called Opposite Party No.2 to confirm the status and Opposite Party No. 2 called customer care of Spicejet Airlines regarding cancellation of flight they said they have rescheduled the flight for 25 August. The Opposite Party No.2 asked for alterative but they said rest flights were either sold or unavailable so the Complainant have two options either to take booking of 25 August or to the refund. The Complainant made several calls to customer care but they described that they have no other option and advised to get refund of said tickets and Complainant also asked to compensate for difference amount as the fare is higher or to arrange ticket from another flight. The Complainant stated Opposite Party left no alterative and they were unable to reach. Thereafter Complainant booked tickets through Indigo Airlines to reach delhi in urgent and that were 4 to 5 thousand costlier. The Complainant have made several requests to customer care despite this Opposite Party No.1 failed to do the needful and regarding extra amount paid by Complainant.
Section 34 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which defines jurisdiction of District Commission, reads as follows:-
Section 34 Jurisdiction of District Commission.
(1) …….
(2) A complaint shall be instituted in a District Commission within the local limits of whose jurisdiction,
(a) the opposite party or each of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, ordinarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain; or
(b) any of the opposite parties, where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business or has a branch office, or personally works for gain, provided that in such case the permission of the District Commission is given; or
(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises; or
(d) the complainant resides or personally works for gain.
In the present case, Complainant resides in Raipur, Chattisgarh and Opposite Party No.1 is having its office at 319, Udyog Vihar, Phase IV, Gurgaon, Haryana against whom Complainant filed this complaint for recovery of excess amount paid by him for the purchasing of tickets of other airlines due to flight cancellation by Opposite Party No.1, neither of the parties falls within the jurisdiction of this Commission as well as there is no cause of action, wholly or in part arises in the jurisdiction of this Commission. Further, the Complainant is not alleging any deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party No.2.
In view of the above discussion, the complaint is returned to Complainant with liberty to file the same in the appropriate forum.
Order announced on 16.05.24.
Copy of this order be given to the Complainant free of cost.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(Anil Kumar Bamba)
Member
(Adarsh Nain)
Member
(Surinder Kumar Sharma)
President
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.