DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016
Case No.534/2013
Yateender Singh Jafa,
148 SFS Apartments, Hauz Khas, Aurobindo Marg,
New Delhi-110016 ….Complainant
Versus
Swiss International Airlines Limited,
Tower B, Building No.10, 12th Floor,
Sector 25, DLF City Phase-II, Gurgaon-122002
D.Paul’s Travel & Tours Ltd.
B-50, Shivalik, Malaviya Nagar,
New Delhi-110017
Akbar Travel of India (P) Ltd.
205, 2nd Floor, 27 Barakhamba Road,
New Delhi - 110001 ….Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 29.10.2013
Date of Order : 17.12.2021
Coram:
Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
Sh. U.K. Tyagi, Member
ORDER
President: Ms. Monika A Srivastava
The complainant has filed the present complaint seeking refund of the cost of tickets as also interest on the refund money @ 18% per annum and
Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental distress caused to them by negligence and deficiency in service against OP No. 1 i.e. Swiss Airlines Pvt. Ltd. and as far as OP 2 i.e. D’Pauls is concerned it has been prayed that a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- be given along with an additional prayer that OP No. 2 be not permitted to seek any Commission from the refund. OP No. 3 is Akbar Travel of India (P) Ltd. who was impleaded after the order of this Commission dated 03.04.2014.
It is the case of the complainant that he and his wife had confirmed tickets to Zurich vide Flight no. Swiss LX 147. The tickets were purchased through OP no.2 which are annexed as Annexure C-1 and C-2 along with the complaint however, the complainants could not board the flight because of ill health of Complainant No.1. The complainant alleges that on the suggestion of the representative of the OP no.2 the complainants booked again for the next day vide Jet Airways, annexures C-5, C-6 have been placed on record. It is the case of the complainant that were told by the representative of the OP No.2 that they would have to book the return tickets afresh as these automatically get cancelled when there is ‘no show’ by the passenger. They boarded the flights to Zurich on the very next day. The complainants sent an email on 22.06.2012 to OP No.1 explaining why they could not board their Zurich Delhi flight on 22.06.2012 and sought refund of their money in full. The copy of the email is annexed as Annexure ‘C-7’.
After their return from the holiday, they received a letter from OP No. 2 stating that the matter was between OP No.1 i.e. Airlines and the passenger and that if there is a ‘no show’ then the consequences are to be borne only by the passenger. The copy of the letter is Annexure ‘C- 9’. After the receipt of the legal notice sent by the complainant the OP No.1 replied that the documents supplied to them were not in order for processing his claim. Thereafter OP no1 telephonically informed the complainant that the full refund was sanctioned and that it would be channelled through the travel agent who sold the tickets to them.
OP No. 1 has refuted the allegations levelled against them by stating that as far as they are concerned the complainant is not a consumer as he has not availed of any service of OP No. 1. Since there is no relationship of consumer and service provider the OP No. 1 is not liable under the present complaint as consideration, if any, has been paid to OP No. 2. They have further stated the tickets booked by the complainant were non-refundable and non-transferable, however, after receiving and reviewing the medical certificate of the complainant OP No. 1 has refunded full amount of Rs. 1,00,854 /- in regard to the cancelled air tickets and was duly received by the travel agent i.e. Akbar Travels on 05.02.2014 as per the policy of the company. It was further stated that the allegations relating to negligence and efficiency in service are false and frivolous as OP No. 1 has gone out of its way to give to the complainant refund of non- refundable tickets. They have also denied any delay on their part to process the request of the complainant. It is stated that the delay, if any was caused by the complainant himself in tendering requisite medical certificates and that the present complaint is filed with the intention of maligning the impeccable and spotless reputation of OP No. 1.
The OP No.2 has refuted all the allegations of the complainant and have stated that their representative routinely enquires about the passengers when the computer shows “no show” and further that the tickets of Jet Airways were provided at the behest of the complainant. They further deny any knowledge of the conversation between their representative and the complainant stating that they were not privy to that conversation. The have further stated the amount of refund was kept ready vide cheque no. 000101 dated 22.11.2013 drawn in favour of Mamta Jafa for Rs.99,000/- annexed as Annexure A along with their Reply but the complainant has wilfully not collected the said cheque. It is further stated by them that they are liable to deduct service charge for refund process and that it is the OP No. 1 who was to refund the entire amount paid by the Complainants. They say that the service charges are not unauthorised or arbitrarily deducted and that they have rightly charged Rs.1854/- as refund process which is done by all travel agents. It is stated that there is no negligence or deficiency in service on their part and that the present complaint has been filed by the complainant to gain sympathy of the court and to harass OP No. 2.
Vide order dated 09.09.2015 this Commission directed that the payment received by the OPNo.3 which was given to them by OP No.1 on account of refund of tickets of the complainant be released to the Complainant. Therefore, payment of Rs. 99,000/- was certified by the complainant to have been received by him. The grievance of the complainant now is that he was not refunded the full amount and that the amount was released after a long legal battle with the parties and further that the OP No.2 is not entitled to have his commission from the said refund. He has further prayed for interest on the actual sum from the date the amount was paid till the actual release and compensation for harassment and mental distress.
The contention of the OP No.1 that there is no consumer relationship between the complainant and them as no consideration was paid to them is not correct and cannot be upheld. The OP No.1 has refunded an amount of Rs. 1,00,854/- to its agent Akbar Travels on 05.02.2014 hence, the complaint is partly allowed and OP No. 1 is directed to pay interest @ 9% p.a. from the date 22.06.2012 till 05.02.2014 and OP No. 2 is directed to pay interest @ 9% from 06.02.2014 till it was actually paid to the complainant.
The contention of the OP No.2 that the cheque of the complainant was ready prior to their receiving money from OP No.1 is untenable. Therefore, OP No.2 is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation to the complainant as they are the service provider to the complainant and they were deficient in their service by not helping the complainant in getting to recover their amount from OP No.1. OP No. 2 is not only an agent for providing tickets but should also be an agent in helping the complainant in getting a refund of the tickets as they rightly claimed their commission from the refund.
No order as to costs. File be consigned to record room after giving copy of the order to the parties. The order be also uploaded on the website.
