Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/424/2021

Onkarjot Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

SpiceJet Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Gurditt Singh Saini

09 Feb 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/424/2021
Date of Institution	:	1.7.2021
Date of Decision	:	9.2.2023

 

Onkarjot Singh aged 23 years S/o S. Harjinder Singh R/o H. No.64, Village Dadumajra, U.T., Chandigarh, through his authorized person S. Harjinder Singh.

 

… Complainant

V E R S U S

 

• Spicejet Ltd. through its Chief Executive officer 319, Udyog Vihar, Phase IV, Sector 18, Gurugram (Haryana)-122016.
•  Grand Tarvel Planners (P) Ltd. through its Director SCO 117-119, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh 160017.

.  … Opposite Party

 

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

 

ARGUED BY		Sh. Gurdit Singh Saini, Advocate for the complainant. None for OP No.1 Sh. Shubham Sharma, Advocate proxy for Sh. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate  for OP No.2

Per surjeet kaur, Member

• Briefly stated, the complainant booked a ticket of airlines of OP No.1 from OP No.2 from Delhi to Canada  for travel date of 11.9.2020 after paying a total consideration of Rs.89,625/- and  it was mentioned in the ticket that the amount paid is not refundable.   On 11.9.2020 when the complainant alongwith his father went to Delhi to board the flight they received a message on the way from OP No.2 that the flight will go on 12.9.2020 instead of 11.9.2020 and the same ticket will be effective but contrary to that the complainant received a copy of ticket showing date of flight as 13.9.2020. It is alleged that when the complainant did not get any satisfactory response or confirmation from Ops NO.1&2 for the running of flight under the compelling circumstances he has to purchase a new ticket from Air-canada by paying fresh amount of Rs.1,05,000/- for his travelling with travel date 14.9.2020 and the said fact was intimated to OP No.2 by the complainant and requested it for refund. Still again on 12.9.2020 the complainant received a ticket through email from OP No.2 for the travel date 14.9.2020  from Delhi to Toronto in Eurontalitic Airways with information that now flight will go on 14.9.2020. Alleging the aforesaid act of Opposite Parties deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part, this complaint has been filed
• The Opposite Party NO.1 in its reply stated that the complainant booked the ticket through OP No.2 on 10.9.2020 for travel from Delhi to Toronto on 13.9.2020 in a chartered flight under PNR No. C5K6PL. It is averred that due to COVID 19 the said flight was postponed by one day i.e. instead of 13.9.2020 the said flight re-scheduled for 14.9.2020. It is submitted that all passengers of the said flight including the complainant herein were informed about the said schedule change by sending message on the provided mobile number and email address.  The intimation was given to all the passengers including the complainant  on 11.9.2020 at 23:25 hours and in pursuant to receipt of the said intimation all the passengers boarded the flight on re-scheduled timings and date, except two passengers namely complainant and one Subhpreet singh. The said two passengers were declared ‘no show’ for the said fight resultantly their entire fare was forfeited. It is alleged that the complainant has himself flouted the norms/terms and conditions contained in terms of carriage, and he is not entitled for any relief.  All other allegations made in the complaint has been denied being wrong.
• Opposite Party No.2 in its reply stated that on 10.9.2020 at about 9.:58 P.M. the answering OP informed the complainant by sending whats app massage on his mobile number that the flight in question has rescheduled for 13.9.2020 at 00.30 a.m. i.e. 14.9.2020, which was acknowledged by the complainant.  It is vehemently denied that the complainant ever informed the answering OP regarding purchase of ticket from Air Canada for 14.9.2020. It is averred that the answering OP raised the matter of refund of the price of the ticket with the OP No.1 but OP No.1 shown its inability to refund the ticket. It is averred that there is no deficiency on the part of OP No.2 as the refund if any is to be made by the concerned airlines and not by the answering OP. Denying all other allegation made in the complaint it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
• Rejoinder was filed and averments made in the consumer complaint were reiterated
• Contesting parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
• We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and gone through the record of the case.
• The sole grouse of the complainant through the present complaint is that OPs time and again changed the date and timing of flight and therefore, due to this very unsatisfactory confirmation from OPs No.1&2 for the running of flight under compelling circumstances, he had to purchase  fresh ticket of Air Canada by paying an amount of Rs.1,05,000/-  for traveling from Delhi to Toronto on 14.9.2020. Due to this deficient act of the OPs the complainant could not avail their services despite making payment for the ticket. Thus the complainant prayed for refund of the price of the unused ticket issued by the Ops No.1&2, which was denied by them and hence forced the complainant to file the present complaint.  
• The stand taken by OP No.2 the agent/planner is that it is the OP No.1 who had to refund the  disputed amount and it cannot be held liable for any deficiency in service.
• On the other hand, OP No.1 (the Spice Jet Airlines) has taken the stand as though it was the choice of the complainant to fly through another airlines on the day of his choice but he was duly provided rescheduled/postponed tickets. So far as the question of refund is concerned the ticket in question is non refundable/non-changeable.
• It is an admitted fact that the complainant paid Rs.89,625/- to OP No.1 through OP No.2 for the ticket from Delhi to Toronto but due to non-confirmation of the rescheduled timing of the flight the complainant had to purchase ticket of another airlines. A combined perusal of tickets issued by OP No.1 through OP No.2 Annexure P-3, P-4 and P-6 reveal that initially the travel date of the flight was 11.9.2020 then it was rescheduled for 13.9.2020 and again it was rescheduled for 14.9.2020. The grouse of the complainant is that he had to take admission in college at Canada on 14.9.2020 and that is why he booked the flight for 11.9.2020 but the OPs postponed the original schedule of the flight time & again and did not confirm him the same in time, thus, under the compelling circumstances he had to book ticket of another airlines but the OPs did not refund the price of the ticket on the ground of its being non-refundable.
• A thorough glance of the terms and conditions of tickets Annexures P-4 and P-6 show that under clause 28 it is mentioned that in case of postpones the flight beyond hundred and twenty minutes or more the affected passengers shall be entitled either for full refund of the amount paid by him or to be accommodated alternate flight. We are of the opinion that in the instant case the OPs miserably failed to take timely action by accommodating the complainant in alternative flight rather it kept the complainant in dilemma regarding the confirmed date of flight which is quite apparent from tickets placed on record by the complainant wherein the OPs time and again intimated different travel timings of the flight to the complainant, which forced the complainant to take services of another airline, so that he may reach his destination on time. Hence, there is clear cut deficiency on the part of OPs and they are liable to refund the price of the ticket to the complainant.    

 

• In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly allowed. OPs are directed as under:-

 

to refund Rs.89625/- (the price of the ticket) to the complainant with interest @9% P.A. from the date of booking of ticket till realization

 

to pay Rs.5000/- to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to him;

 

 

to pay Rs.5000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

 

• This order be complied with by the OPs within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they 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 
•    Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned

			Sd/-
			[Pawanjit Singh]
			President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur] Member   Sd/-
			[Suresh Kumar Sardana]
mp			Member