Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/380/2022

Mukul Goyal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Spicejet Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Vishav Bharti Gupta

02 Nov 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/380/2022
Date of Institution	:	30.3.2022
Date of Decision	:	2/11 /2023

 

Mukul Goyal son of OP Goyal resident of House No.241, Sector 32/A, Chandigarh.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

Spicejet Ltd., 319, Udyog Vihar, Phase IV, Gurgaon, Haryana, India.

… Opposite Party

CORAM :	SHRI PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	SHRI SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Complainant in person.
	:	Sh. Chetan Gupta, Advocate proxy for Sh. Amit Punj, Advocate for OP Advocate for OP.

Per Pawanjit Singh, President

1. The present consumer complaint has been filed by Mukul Goyal complainant against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as the OP).  The brief facts of the case are as under:-

1. It transpires from the averments as projected in the consumer complaint that on 21.10.2019 the complainant booked four morning flight tickets from OP by paying Rs.16,528/- vide invoice Annexure C-1 for his sister Anubha Goyal and family member Rajesh Gupta, Tanmay Gupta and Gaurik Gupta from Delhi to Mumbai for the journey to be performed on 11.11.2019 on which date the marriage reception of the complainant was fixed at Mumbai. The flight booking was confirmed vide PNR E161XR with flight No.SG8911. On the day of journey when aforesaid passengers came to IGI Airport Delhi to board the scheduled flight,  it was informed by the staff of OP that the flight has been cancelled. The OP has cancelled the subject tickets at very last moment which has caused intensive pain, distress and mental agony to the family members of the complainant.  Due to the aforesaid act of the OP, the passengers were compelled to purchase another tickets of  Vistara Airlines by paying an amount of Rs.52,144/-  and the said flight landed in Mumbai at 7:30 p.m. as a result of which the family members of the complainant reached at the marriage reception at Muluha Hotel, Mumbai only around 21:45. p.m. Before the arrival of the aforesaid family members the marriage  reception cake ceremony and dinner  already been floated and most of the guests at function had already left. It  is alleged that due to sudden cancellation of tickets the complainant’s family could not focus on the marriage reception. The complainant earlier also filed complaint before the Commission which was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh one and as such this complaint has been filed. It is alleged that the aforesaid act of OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on its part. 
2. OP resisted the consumer complaint and filed its written version, inter alia, taking preliminary objections of maintainability. On merits admitted that the subject four ticketswere purchased by the complainant and stated that the tickets were cancelled due to operational technical snag which was beyond the control and power of the OP. It is further stated that the tickets fare was refunded in favaur of the agent Seven Seaz Vacation Pvt. Ltd. through whom the complainant had booked the  subject tickets and even compensation of Rs.14060/- was offered to the complainant i.e. Rs.3515/-  to each passenger as per the terms and conditions of the circular/CAR issued by DGCA and as the complainant had not shared the account number the aforesaid amount could not be transferred in the account of the passengers.   The cause of action set up by the complainant is denied.  The consumer complaint is sought to be contested.
3. Despite grant of numerous opportunities, no rejoinder was filed by the complainant to rebut the stand of the OP.

2. In order to prove their case, parties have tendered/proved their evidence by way of respective affidavits and supporting documents.
3. We have heard the complainant in person and learned counsel for the OP and also gone through the file carefully.
   1. At the very outset, it may be observed that when it is an admitted case of the parties that  the complainant had booked four tickets for his sister and other family members by paying Rs.16528/-  from Delhi to Mumbai as is also evident from Annexure C-1 and due to cancellation of the flight of the  OP, the passengers were compelled to purchased four fresh tickets for the same date for an amount of Rs.52144/- as is evident from Annexure C-2, the case is reduced to a narrow compass as it is to be determined if  due to the cancellation of the flight by the OP without intimating the  passengers in question, amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and the complainant is entitled for relief as is the case of the complainant or if the aforesaid flight was cancelled due to operational snag and the complaint is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.
   2. In order to prove the fact that the flight was cancelled due to the operational technical snag and also that the OP has already refunded Rs.16528/- in the account of the agent i.e Seven Seaz Vacation Pvt. Ltd..  through whom the complainant had booked the ticket, the onus heavily lies upon the Ops. However, the OPs have failed to adduce any iota of evidence in order to prove that the amount of Rs.16528/- after cancellation of the subject tickets  has been refunded to the agent and it further refunded the same to the passengers, especially when the complainant has come with the specific plea that the OPs have not refunded the aforesaid amount. In this manner the complainant is not only entitled for the refund of the ticket amount which the complainant has purchased for his sister and family but he is also entitled  for the difference of amount which the complainant had paid for purchase of the new tickets Annexure C-2. In this manner, the complainant is entitled for the amount of Rs.35,616/- (Rs.52144 – 16528/-), which they spent in excess for the purchase of fresh tickets from another airline in order to perform their journey.
   3. The OPs has further come with the defence that it had already offered compensation of Rs.14060/- to the complainant  as per terms and conditions. However, nothing has come on record that the OPs had given any information to the complainant about the cancellation of the ticket rather as per case  of the complainant the passengers came to know about the cancellation of the flight only when they reached the airport.  The OPs have not assessed the compensation as per terms and conditions rather each passenger is required to be paid atleast an amount of Rs.5000/- for the mental pain they had suffered at the airport  as well as not attended the whole family further due to the sudden cancellation of the flight. In this manner, the complainant is entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs.20,000/-.
4. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds, the same is hereby partly allowed and OP is directed as under :-

1. to pay ₹35616/- to the complainant(s) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of cancellation of tickets till onwards.
2. to pay an amount of ₹20,000/-to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;
3. to pay ₹10,000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

5. This order be complied with by the OP within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) & (ii) above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(iii) above.
6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.
7. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced 2/11/2023			Sd/- [Pawanjit Singh] President
mp
			Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana] Member