BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.112 of 2023
Date of Instt. 06.04.2023
Date of Decision:28.10.2024
1. Shiva Beri s/o Sh. Akshay Beri r/o 196, Guru Gobind Singh Avenue, Jalandhar.
2. Kanika Beri w/o Sh. Shiva Beri r/o 196, Guru Gobind Singh Avenue, Jalandhar.
..........Complainants
Versus
1. SpiceJet Ltd., 319, Udyog Vihar, Phase IV, Gurgaon-122016 Haryana, India.
2. Yatra Online Limited, Gulf Adiba, 4th Floor, Plot No.272, Phase II, Udyog Vihar, Sector 20, Gurugram, Haryana 122008.
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)
Present: Complainant in Person.
Sh. A. K. Gandhi, Adv. Counsel for OP No.1.
Sh. Lalit Huria, Adv. Counsel for OP No.2.
Order
Dr. HarveenBhardwaj (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainants, wherein it is alleged that the complainant No.1 alongwith his spouse i.e. complainant No.2 had booked two tickets through Yatra.com/OP No.2 for Spicejet on 26.02.2023 and thereafter on 27.02.2023 he booked two train tickets of Amritsar Shatabdi for 09.03.2023 from Jalandhar to Delhi for a sum of Rs.2063/-. On 01.03.2023 the complainant got text message from auto mated system of OP that ‘Dear Customer (PNR:QK2K6B): Due to operational reason, your Spicejet Flight SG 165 from Mumbai has been revised. Here are the updated details: SG 165, March 9, 2023 Mumbai (Terminal 2)-Madurai (Terminal 1), 1300 hrs – 1515 hrs.’ Thereafter, revised ticket as per text message for complainant No.1 and 2 for 09.03.2023 generated by the system of OP. The complainant had already booked train tickets for 09.03.2023 which would have reached New Delhi at about 10:50 PM and it would have not been possible for the complainants to take the flight. The complainant called customer care and appraised them about the facts and only after getting confirmation from about flight tickets, the train tickets were booked by the complainant but failed to get any positive response from them. On 05.03.2023 the complainant No.1 again received an email from OP that ‘Due to operational reason, your Spicejet flight from Delhi to Madurai has been revised to the next available option on Spicejet network’. The complainant gave reply to this email. Thereafter the complainant no.1 had canceled the train tickets and booked new ticket for 08.03.2023 for an amount of Rs.2296/-. Again on 08.03.2023 when the complainant had already reached Delhi got email from OP that the flight from Mumbai has been revised and then on 08.03.2023 the complainant No.1 received a text message from OP No.1 regarding revised of flight from Madurai to Delhi. The complainant also received an email qua changing of timing of flight on 15 March, then the complainant in written reply to said email conveyed to the OP regarding the malpractice being played by them then instead of giving a satisfactory reply, OP started giving lame excuses. The complainant by requesting OP No.1 proponed the airline ticket to 13th March, 2023. On 08.03.2023 complainant No.1 booked Poppys Hotel Madurai for 11.03.2023 to 13.03.2023 by paying Rs.8864.45. On 12.03.2023 when complainants No.1 and 2 were residing at hotel then complainant No.1 got an email from OP No.1 that due to operational reason flight from Madurai to Delhi has been revised to the next available option on spicejet network. A few hours before complainants return flight to Delhi, Spicejet Airlines postponed the flight by two days without any prior notification, resulting in complainant No.1 cancelled the return flight and booked another airline’s return flight, causing further monetary loss to complainant No.1. On cancellation a sum of Rs.2 was deducted, but when the amount was credited in the account of complainant then Rs.2286/- were deducted. Thus, the frequent changes in flight timings caused complainants mental tension and harassment and as such, as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP No.1 be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainants and Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the loss of business opportunities and valuable clients due to their negligence and Rs.50,000/- for emotional distress and frustration caused by their actions. Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses and OP No.2 be directed to pay balance amount of Rs.2286/-.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and accordingly, OP No.1 appeared through its counsel and filed written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is false, vexatious and has been filed with a malafide intention to harass the OP No.1. It is an attempt to waste the precious time of this Forum and hence is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the present complaint is not maintainable against the answering OP and the same is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the complainant has not come before the Forum with clean hands and suppressed the material facts. So, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed on this score. On merits, the factum with regard to booking of the air tickets by the complainant is admitted, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.
3. OP No.2 filed its separate written reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the users of the OP are bound by the terms and conditions of the Master User Agreement which they accept at the time of using the website of the OP. It is further averred that this Commission has no jurisdiction. It is further averred that the OP is an intermediary between the service providers and the customers and it does not have any interference in the modus operandi and the liability for any changes, deficiencies related to the service provided by the service providers. It is further averred that there is no grievance left as the answering OP had already refunded the amount to the complainant and had resolved the issue. On merits, the factum with regard to booking of the air tickets by the complainant is admitted, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.
4. Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.
5. In order to prove their respective version, the counsel for both the parties has produced on the file their respective version.
6. We have heard the parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by all the parties very minutely.
7. The complainant has alleged that he wanted to go to Madurai with his wife and for this purpose, there was no direct flight to Madurai and he got booked the flight on 26.02.2023 for 10.03.2023 from Delhi to Madurai as per Ex.C-1 and he got tickets booked from Madurai to Delhi for 14.03.2023 on the same day i.e. 26.02.2023 vide Ex.C-2. It has been proved that the tickets were confirmed and he has proved the email of the same day Ex.C-3, vide which his tickets were confirmed. The complainant has proved the tickets of train Ex.C-4 for going to Delhi from Jalandhar in order to board the flight on 10.03.2023. He got booked his train for 09.03.2023. The message dated 01.03.2023 has been proved by the complainant Ex.C-5, vide which he was informed by the OP No.1 that his flight from Mumbai to Madurai has been revised to 09.03.2023 and revised tickets for 09.03.2023 were sent to the complainant on 01.03.2023 vide Ex.C-5/A. The complainant has alleged that when he contacted the OP No.1 and apprised them that his train will reach Delhi at 22:50 and it will not be possible for him to take the flight at 13:00 hours, but the OP No.1 did not give any response to the complainant. Again the complainant received a message Ex.C-6 on 05.03.2023 that his flight from Delhi to Madurai has been revised for 11.03.2023. Considering the harassment done to him by the OPs for revising the scheduled time of flight time and again, he canceled his train tickets after sending the email to the OP. He has proved on record the email Ex.C-6/A and cancellation Ex.C-7. He did not get any positive response from the OP. He again got his train tickets booked on 05.03.2023 for 08.03.2023 Ex.C-8. The complainant has alleged that he made request to the OP No.1 to prepone their tickets to 09.03.2023 as his train tickets have been booked for 08.03.2023. On 08.03.2023, vide Ex.C-10 he received an email about his flight on 09.03.2023 from Mumbai Terminal-2 to Madurai. Vide Ex.C-11 again complainant received a message and emails on 08.03.2023 that the date of his return tickets has been changed from 14.03.2023 to 15.03.2023. Again vide Ex.C12A he received a message on 08.03.2023 that his return tickets have been preponed to 13.03.2023. The complainant had to change his plan and had to book hotel in Madurai from 11.03.2023 to 13.03.2023 as per Ex.C-13. As per Ex.C-14, the date was again changed from 13.03.2023 to 15.03.2023 and ultimately, the complainant had to cancel the ticket and rebook ticket as per Ex.C-14A. Correspondence was made vide email Ex.C-14 to the OP for refund. While making refund, amount of Rs.2286/- was deducted as cancellation charges from the account of the complainant without any fault of the complainant as per Ex.C-15 and Ex.C-18. The complainant had to rebook the ticket from Madurai to Delhi on 13.03.2023 as Ex.C-16. As per Ex.C-17, the complainant was offered voucher of Rs.1000/-, which was refused by the complainant vide Ex.C-17A.
8. As per the detail of the booking and return of the tickets and changing of the dates, it is proved that the complainant had to suffer a severe harassment at the hands of the OPs. It has spoiled the trip of the complainant.
9. The contention of the OP No.2 is that there is no fault and deficiency in service of the OP No.2. There is no lacuna on the part of the OP No.2 while performing and complying with its business duties. The OP No.2 is an online platform that acts as an intermediary between the airlines and the customers and is bound by the policies of the Airlines. The refund was already approved at the end of the OP No.2.
10. The contention of the OP No.1 is that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.1. Due prior intimation was sent to the complainant regarding the change of dates and rescheduling of flights due to irregular operations and technical reasons. Emails were sent to the complainant and the changed schedule was agreeable to the complainant also because of which he availed the flight. The flight was rescheduled because of operational and technical reasons. At the request of the complainant, the tickets were cancelled and the refund of entire ticket amount was made by the OP No.1, therefore, there is no negligence on the part of the OPs nor there is any deficiency in service.
11. It is proved that the the complainant got booked the flight for himself and his family members in advance even for the return journey, so that he may make his journey comfortable. He also got the tickets of train booked according to the schedule. It is proved that the flight was rescheduled number of times because of which the complainant had to cancel his tickets of train as there was no direct flight to Madurai and rebook his tickets for train. There are many emails on the record which show the correspondence between the OP and the complainant. Though, due intimation was sent to the complainant vide messages regarding the rescheduling, but it was not rescheduled only once rather it was rescheduled for number of times due to alleged technical and operational reasons. There is no evidence on the record to prove what were those operational and technical reasons, which forced the OPs to reschedule the flight time and again harassing the complainant. There is no evidence on the record nor any guidelines nor rules filed on the record nor any technical reason has been explained to show the genuine act of the OP. The OPs had taken the arbitrary decisions to reschedule the flights time and again. This proves that the OPs No.1 and 2 rendered deficient services to the complainant. There is no evidence to corroborate the stand of the OPs. It can well be presumed that the complainant planned his trip for enjoyment, but because of the act and conduct of the OPs, he had to remain under constant pressure and he had to face financial as well as mental harassment and all his dreams of enjoyment of the trip were shattered due to the deficient services of the OPs. The OP No.2 has stated that they are mere intermediary and they had approved the refund of the complainant and the OP No.2 is not liable, but this contention is not tenable. It has been admitted by the OP No.2 that they were in the knowledge of the rescheduling of the flight though it was not informed to them by the complainant, it clearly shows that the refund was approved by them and they were well in touch with the OP No.1 regarding the timings of the airlines, therefore, OP No.2 cannot escape from its liability. There is clear cut deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. It has been held by the Hon’ble State Commission, Punjab in a case titled as ‘Yatra Online & Spicejet Vs. Gulwinder Singh & Ors.’ that ‘spicejet and yatra online liable for causing harassment due to cancellation of flights and awarded compensation for harassment being faced due to cancellation of flight.’ It has been held by the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh State Commission in a case titled as ‘Rachna Dogra Vs SpiceJet Limited’ that ‘SpiceJet has shown casual approach towards its customers and they were deficient in providing services to its customers By cancelling the flight especially when confirmed tickets were supplied to its customers spicejet has not only committed grave unfair trade practice but they have also adopted malpractice and deficiency in services’. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, U.T., Chandigarh, allowed the case titled as ‘Sh. Viney Vaid Vs. SpiceJet Ltd.’ and passed the order to reimburse the amount paid by complainant, spent by him for return journey, compensation to the complainant on account of mental tension, agony, harassment suffered on account of deficiency in service and for the unfair trade practice and litigation expenses. The said order was upheld by the Hon’ble State Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh and by the Hon’ble National Commission also.
12. In the present case also the OP No.1 has shown casual approach towards the complainant and OPs were deficient in cancelling and rescheduling the flight time and again when the complainant was having confirmed ticket. This proves the malpractice, deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on behalf of the OPs.
13. So, in view of the above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OP No.2 is directed to pay balance amount of Rs.2286/- to the complainant. The OPs No.1 & 2 are directed to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
14. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jaswant Singh Dhillon Jyotsna Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj
28.10.2024 Member Member President
