Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/589/2023

SURJIT KAUR - Complainant(s)

Versus

SPICEJET LTD. 319,UDYOG VIHAR , PHASE IV,GURGAON-122016 HARYANA INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

EKTA SHARMA

30 Aug 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/589/2023
Date of Institution	:	19.12.2023
Date of Decision	:	30/8/2024

 

Surjit Kaur wd/o S. Mohinder Singh resident of # 345, Advocates Enclave, Sector 49A, Chandigarh.

Complainant

 

Versus

1.   SpiceJet Ltd.,319, Udyog Vihar, Phase IV, Gurgaon - 122016 Haryana, India, through its Managing Director Sh Ajay Singh and its Nodal Officer: Mr. Sachin Suri

2 TBO.com Corporate Office: 728, Udyog Vihar, Phase V, Gurgaon-122016, Haryana through its authorised officer Ms Beena kashyap

3. Global Xpedia SCO-367-368 1st Floor Sector 35B Chandigarh 160035 109500 through its authorised officer/proprietor Ms Parneet Kaur

Opposite Parties

 

CORAM :	PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER MEMBER

                       

ARGUED BY	:	Ms. Ekta Sharma, Advocate for complainant (through VC)
	:	Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate for OP No.1 (through VC)
	:	Sh. Puneet, Legal Manager for OP No.2 (through VC)
	:	OP No.3  exparte

Per surjeet kaur, Member

     Briefly stated  the complainant alongwith her grandson planned a holiday trip to Gangtok, Sikkim in the month of June, 2023. Since, there is no direct flight from Chandigarh to Gangtok, so the complainant decided to take flight from Chandigarh to New Delhi and thereafter from New Delhi to Gangtok, Sikkim. Accordingly, she purchased two return tickets from Indigo Air Lines for herself and her grandson.  It is stated that only Spice Jet operates a direct flight from New Delhi to Pakyong Airport, Gangtok, Sikkim and thus have a monopoly over the above route. There is no other airline which operates a direct flight in the aforesaid corridor. Accordingly, the complainant purchased two Air tickets of OP No. 1 through Opposite Parties   No.2 and 3 for a sum of
Rs.51,000/-. It was assured by all the opposite parties that the flight would be on time and the complainant would not face any hassle while traveling.  The complainant alongwith her grandson Karandeep Sandhu boarded the Indigo flight on 16th June, 2023 from chandigarh and reached New Delhi where they stayed in a hotel. In the morning when they got up to take the Spice Jet flight from Indira Gandhi Airport, Delhi to Pakyong Airport, Gangtok, she along with her grandson was shell shocked to find out the Spice Jet had cancelled its flight at the eleventh hour leaving them in the lurch. Since the complainant had already got booked the rooms and other facilities in Sikkim, she had no choice but to request the opposite party No.1 to provide alternate flight. However, the opposite parties did not heed to the requests and instead offered the complainant to take its flight from New Delhi to Bagdogra, West Bengal.  The complainant left with no other option but to  accept the said offer of Opposite party  from New Delhi to Bagdogra, West Bengal  for which the complainant had to incur extra cot of Rs.5000 to Rs.5500/- and also incurred expenses of Rs.20,000/- from Bagdogra airport to reach Gangtok, Sikkim.  The misery of the complainant further elevated   when the  the return ticket from Pakyong, Gangtok to New on 25^th June 2023 was also cancelled by the Opposite Party as a result of which the complainant has to buy expensive tickets of Air Asia from Bagdogra to New Delhi. Alleging the aforesaid act of Opposite Parties deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part, this complaint has been filed.

2. The Opposite Parties NO.1 in its reply stated that two tickets were booked in the names of Surjit Kaur and Karandeep Sandhu, on 22.03.2023, for travelling from Delhi to Pakyong on 17.06.2023 and return travel from Pakyong to Delhi to on 25.06.2023. The said booking was done vide PNR Nos. HEISTT and LDB4XJ and the booking was a group booking, done through the travel agency namely Travel Master.in and a sum of Rs.10,400/- It for each PNR was paid to the answering OP by the said agency. The flight from Delhi to Pakyong booked under PNR No. HEI8TT cancelled due to bad weather at Pakyong, the said flight was cancelled and was rescheduled to Delhi to Bagdogra (nearest Airport to Pakyong/Gangtok) on 17.06.2023, leaving Delhi at 1030 hours and arriving Bagdogra at 1320 hours. It is averred that the said intimation was sent to the complainants and upon receipt of the same, they contacted the call centre of the OP, got the PNR HEISTT divided into PNR OK1IVE and boarded the flight from Delhi to Bagdogra. It is stated that in so far as the return flight is concerned, the same was also re-scheduled due to bad weather at Pakyong. The flight schedule was changed to Bagdogra to Delhi on 25.06.2023, leaving Bagdogra at 1310 hours and arriving Delhi at 1610 hours. It is submitted that the complainant contacted the call centre on 23.06.2023, got the PNR LDB4XJ divided into PNR DDSJ8D-and got the reservation cancelled. It is submitted that a sum of Rs.10,400/- was remitted by the travel agency for the said tickets and consequent upon cancellation of the flight by the complainant, the said entire amount was remitted by the answering OP on 23.06.2023 itself to the same travel agency from which, it was received by the answering OP. Thus, there is neither any negligence nor any deficiency in providing any services by the answering OP to the complainant. The OP has acted as per the terms of carriage, by which, it is governed and further the terms of carriage is a binding contract between the airline and passenger. All other allegations made in the complaint has been  denied being wrong. is liable to be dismissed with heavy costs.
3. Opposite party No.2 in its reply stated that Opposite Party No. 2 only acts as an intermediary and provides a medium to Travel suppliers i.e. Opposite Party no. 1 and Travel Buyers i.e. Opposite Party no. 3 to transact with each other solely under Business-to-Business segment, having no direct or indirect business relationship with the retail consumers, End Customers, Passengers Travellers e.g. complainant. refund policy etc., are decided by the respective sellers only. The third-party suppliers i.e. Spicejet Ltd. and thereafter travel agencies i.e. Opposite Party No. 3, book the confirmed ticket as per their business requirements. Moreover, there is no privity of contract between Opposite Party No. 2 and the Complainant. Still further, there is no consumer-service provider relationship between Complainant and Opposite Party No. 2 and resultantly there is no cause of action against Opposite Party. Denying any deficiency on its part a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
4. OP No.3 did not turn up despite due service, hence vide order dated 21.02.2024 it was proceeded against exparte.
5. Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated.
6. Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
8. The sole grouse of the complainant who is a senior citizen is that she had to suffer a lot when she and her grand son planned a trip to Gangtok, Sikkim from Chandigarh. As per the case of the complainant she purchased return ticket from Chandigarh to New Delhi  thereafter New Delhi to Gangtok, Sikkim  but despite  staying in Delhi for one night in order to get the flight for Gangtok, Sikkim in time, but the OP No.1 to the utter shock of the complainant suddenly cancelled  direct flight from New Delhi to Gangtok, Sikkim  and the complainant was compelled to travel from New Delhi to Bagdogra, West Bagal only instead of Gangtok being the final destination of the complainant. Meaning thereby the 78 years lady had to face challenge while flying directly from Delhi to Gangtok as she had to travel from New Delhi to Bagdogra and thereafter from there to Gangtok, by a taxi which caused a lot of physical harassment and mental agony to the complainant and she had to spend additional money for the same. Not only this, misery of the complainant further elevated when the OP No.1 also cancelled the return ticket. Hence, the complainant prayed for compensation for the harassment undergone by her.
9.  The stand taken by the OP No.1 is that the  refundable amount has already been refunded/remitted to the complainant and re-schedule of the flight was due to bad weather conditions and there is no deficiency on its part.
10. After going through the entire record, it is admitted fact that the complainant is an old lady of 78 years old  who wanted to enjoy the company of her grand son to a trip to Sikkim and in order to make the journey comfortable and hassle free  the  complainant took flight even from Chandigarh to New Delhi but due to sudden cancellation of flight she had to travel up to midway destination and thereafter to the final destination by taxi after facing lot of uneasiness and harassment.
11. Annexure R-2 is the terms and conditions of carriage and clause 61 at page 27 of the same  is reproduced as under:-

“61. Flight Delays

1.x x x x x x x  x

2.x x x x x x x x x

3. x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x

In case, the expected time of departure is delayed in total by more than 24 hours from the original schedule time of departure or in case the delay is more than 6 hours for the flights scheduled to depart between 20:00 or 03:00 Hrs, hotel accommodation shall be provided wherever necessary. SpiceJet shall have absolute discretion in selection of hotels under the given circumstances and no reimbursement shall be made in this regard.”

     From the above it is revealed that in case departure is delayed the hotel accommodation was to be provide to the complainant. 

12. We opine that the terms and conditions of the OP No.1 are totally unilateral where it is  mentioned that in case of any cancellation of the booking or any flight changes it can charge from the consumers as per clause 8C but in our view there are certain other important clauses need to be included to compensate the consumer including the complainant  when the cancellation is from the side of airlines(OP No.1). 
13. As per Annexure R-3  the instructions of Civil Aviation  the civil aviation requirements are to be provided to the passengers by the airlines due to the cancellation of flight and delays in flights. The relevant portion of clause 3.3.1 is reproduced as under:-

“3.3 Cancellation of Flight

In order to reduce inconvenience caused to the passengers as a result of the cancellations of the flights on which they are booked to travel, whenever possible, airlines should endeavour to invariably inform the passengers of cancellations of their flights as far in advance as possible of the scheduled time of departure provided at the time of effecting his/her reservation, the passenger has given relevant contact information e.g. telephone number (landline or mobile), and/or fax number and/or e-mail id or in any alternate reasonable form requested for by the airline.”

     but adverse to the same no such confirmation was given in advance to the complainant before the scheduled time of departure which was having direct affect on the further booking of hotels at Gangtok, Sikkim. Further as per clause 3.6.1 the passengers are to be offered free meals. The relevant portion of the said clause is reproduced as under:-

“3.6 Facilities to be offered to passengers

3.6.1 passengers shall be offered free of charge the following:

a) Meals and refreshment in relation to waiting time

b)Hotel Accommodation when necessary (including transfers)”

     But in the instant case no meal or accommodation was provided to the complainant who was a 78 year old lady  whereas as per clause 3.6.2 the airlines was to pay particular attention to the needs of persons with reduced mobility and any other person(s) accompanying them.

14. The  above-extracted terms and conditions were totally ignored by the OP NO.1 meaning thereby the OP No.1 did not adhere to its own terms and conditions, hence the OP No.1 has failed to provide proper service to the complainant, which caused a lot of mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant and as such there is deficiency on the part of OP No.1. 
15. In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly allowed. OP No.1 is directed as under:-

 

1. to pay ₹30,000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment;
2. to pay ₹10,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

 

16. This order be complied with by the OP No.1 within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy thereof, failing which the amount(s) mentioned at Sr.No.(i) above shall carry penal interest @ 12% per annum (simple) from the date of expiry of said period of 45 days till realisation, over and above payment of ligation expenses.
17. Complaint qua OPs No. 2&3 stands dismissed.
18. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.
19.      Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

			[Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			[Surjeet Kaur] Member
30/8/2024			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
mp			Member