Haryana

Karnal

CC/116/2016

Mr. Shiv Kumar S/o Dharam Pal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Spice Jet Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Kulwant Kadiyan

07 Feb 2018

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL. 

                                                     Complaint No.116 of 2016

                                                     Date of instt.:18.04.2016

                                                     Date of decision:07.02.2018

 

Mr. Shiv Kumar son of Shri Dharam Pal resident of Ashoka Nursery, Kunjpura Road, Karnal.

 

                                                                   ……..Complainant.

                                        Vs.

1. Spice Jet Limited, cargo complex, terminal 1-B, Indira Gandhi International Domestic Terminal, New Delhi-37 through its Manager.

2. Akal Travels, Railway Road, opposite Khalsa College, Karnal through Pardeep Kumar.

                                                                 …….. Opposite Parties.

 

                  Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before      Sh. Jagmal Singh……….President

                 Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-     Shri Kulwant Kadiyan Advocate for complainant.

                    Shri Rohit Gupta Advocate for OP no.1.

                    Opposite party no.2 exparte.

                                                 

 ORDER:

 

                This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer protection Act 1986, on the averments that from 1.7.2015 to 5.7.2015 complainant visited alongwith his family members i.e. Kamlesh (mother), Kavita Devi (wife), Vardaan (son, 11 years), Arman (son, age 8 years) to Bangalore, Ooty, Mysore and Calicut. On 6^th July, 2015 the complainant booked tickets of Spice Jet Air Lines through Agent, OP no.2 from Calicut to Bangalore for himself and his family members. As per tickets issued by OP, departure of spice Jet no.SG3254 on 6 July, 2015 at 12.15 hours and arrival to Bangalore 13.15 hours, flight duration was 1 hours. On 6.7.2015 the complainant and his family members reached at Calicut Airports at about 10.15 a.m. for going to Bangalore. There the complainant came to know from the official present on Spice Jet Counter that flight has been preponed from 12.15 noon to 10.45 a.m. But the OPs has not given any intimation to the complainant in that regard. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant has also booked Air ticket from Bangalore to Chandigarh for 7^th July, 2015, so the complainant had to reach Bangalore before 8.00 a.m. The complainant was helpless in Calicut with his family. The mother of complainant is a senior citizen and suffering from Diabetic alongwith many multiple disease. There was distance from Calicut to Bangalore of about 400 km with hilly area and thick forest. Complainant had booked a taxi on higher rate i.e.17,000/- because there was strike in Kerala of Petrol Pump owners. The complainant and his family members reached to Bangalore from Calicut by taxi after facing a lot of difficulties due to negligence of the OPs. Complainant and his family members fell seriously ill due to long journey and they took their treatment at Karnal and spent more than Rs.one lakh. In this way there was great deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence complainant filed the present complaint

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, OP no.1 appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action and jurisdiction. On merits, it has been submitted that all the passengers/guests of the OP no.1 are governed by the terms of carriage contained in the e-ticket, framed in accordance with Carriage by Air Act, 1972 and notification regarding application of the carriage which is Non-International. It is further submitted that the flight had been preponed due to the operational reasons and the same was intimated to the complainant on 23.6.2015 via SMS. It has been submitted that the said development was being told to all the passengers from time to time including the complainant. It has been submitted that since the tickets were got booked through agent, and as such the entire amount was credited by the OP no.1 to the said agency on 6^th July, 2015. It has been submitted that the moment complainant accepted the full refund, all grievances were set at rest and he lost all his right to initiate any kind of litigation against the OP no.1. In the instant case, the flight was pre-poned due to operational reasons and the passengers including the complainant were intimated about the said changes. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             None has come present on behalf of OP no.2 and proceeded against exparte by the order of this Forum dated 17.1.2017.

4.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 and closed the evidence on 6.9.2017.

5.             On the other hand, OP no.1 tendered into evidence affidavit of Vijay Roy Ex.OP1/A and documents Ex.O1 to Ex.O4 and closed the evidence on 4.1.2018.

5.             We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

6.             It is alleged by the complainant that on 1.7.2015 the complainant alongwith his family members namely Kamlesh mother, Kavita Devi wife, Vardaan and Arman sons reached Bangalore by Indigo Air lines. It is further alleged that on 6.7.2015 the complainant booked ticket of Spice Jet Air Lines through agent of OP no.2 from Calicut to Bangalore for himself and above mentioned his family members. It is further alleged that as per tickets duly issued by OP, the departure from Calicut of spice Jet no.SG3254 on 6 July, 2015 at 12.15 hours and arrival to Bangalore 13.15 hours, flight duration was 1 hours. The complainant and his family members reached at Calicut Airports at about 10.15 a.m. on 6 July, 2015 for going to Bangalore. Thereafter, complainant came to know from the official present on Spice Jet Counter that time of pre-pone of the flight from 12.15 noon to 10.45 a.m. But no intimation regarding the pre-poning of flight has been given by the OPs to the complainant. It is further alleged that the complainant has also booked Air Tickets from Bangalore to Chandigarh for 7.7.2015 at 9.55 a.m., so they had to reach Bangalore before 8.00 a.m. on 7.7.2015 for which the complainant and his family had to travel by road for 13 hours due to this continuous travelling by taxi, the complainant and his family members fell ill and the complainant spent more than Rs. one lakh on treatment and in this way the OPs were deficient in providing service to the complainant.

7.             On the other hand, the OP no.1 contended that all the passengers/guests of OP no.1 are governed by the terms of Carriage contained in e-ticket, framed in accordance with Carriage by Air Act, 1972. One of clause of aforesaid terms of carriage is “Schedule is subject to change and regulatory authority approvals.”  It is further contended that the flight had been pre-poned due to operation reasons and the passengers including the complainant were intimated about the said changes on 23.06.2015 via SMS at the given mobile numbers and copy of SMS is Ex.O-3. It is further contended that the officials of the Spice Jet had already remitted the full refund into the same travel portal account from which the tickets got booked. It is further contended that since the tickets were got booked through agent, as such the entire amount was credited by OP no.1 to the said agency on 6.7.2015.

8.             According to the complaint of the complainant on 6.7.2015, the complainant booked the tickets of OP no.1 through OP no.2 from Calicut to Bangalore, whereas on perusal of the copy of tickets Ex.C-1, it is found that the tickets were booked on 27.4.2015 and not on 6.7.2015. It is admitted by OP no.1 that the flight in question for 6.7.2015 was pre-poned and the passenger including the complainant were intimated about the change on 23.6.2015 via SMs at the given mobile numbers. Now the question arises that whether the changes can be made in the time. The OP no.1 referred Terms of Carriage Ex.O-1 in this regard. The clause 10 of Ex.O-1 clearly states that “Schedule is subject to change and regulatory authority approvals.” Therefore, according to this clause of the Terms of Carriage, the time can be changed. The OP no.1 has produced on the file copy of SMS as Ex.O-3. From this document i.e. Ex.O-3, it is clear that prior intimation was given to the passenger about the pre-poning of the flight in question as the SMS is dated 23.6.2015. Therefore, contention of OP no.1 that all the passengers were intimated about the change on 23.6.2015 via SMS at the given mobile numbers is correct. Therefore, firstly the allegation of the complainant that he got booked the tickets on 6.7.2015 is wrong as the tickets in question were booked on 27.4.2015. Secondly, the allegation of the complainant that no prior intimation about the change has been given has no force because the OPs have proved on the file that the intimation regarding change in time and pre-poning the flight has been given via SMS on 23.6.2015 at the given mobile numbers. The complainant has failed to produce any cogent evidence to prove the allegations levelled by him in his complaint. Hence no deficiency is found on the part of OP no.1.

9.             It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant has mentioned in para no.6 of the complaint that all happened due to your negligence and in para no.7 also mentioned that you are liable to pay. These facts clearly indicate that the complainant stated that this Forum is negligent and liable to pay whereas  the complainant should have mentioned that the OPs were negligent and OPs were liable to pay, therefore the pleading of the complaint are defective.

10.           Thus, as a sequel of above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 07.02.2018

                                                                       

                                                                    President

                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                           Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 

 

                      (Anil Sharma)     

                        Member