DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD

Dated this the 24^th day of August, 2023

Present  : Sri.Vinay Menon V., President

             : Smt.Vidya A., Member                       

             : Sri.Krishnankutty N.K., Member         Date of filing: 01/02/2023

CC/32/2023

Narayanankutty, Manghat

S/o Late P.Sreedharan Nair,

Pankaj

Pattancherry – 678 532

Palakkad Dist.                                                         -         Complainant                                            

(Party in person)                       

                                                           V/s

1. YES Bank Credit Cards Division,

    YES Bank Limited,

    YES Bank Towers, Plot No.14,

    3^rd Main Road,

    Ambattur Industrial Area,

    Ambattur,

    Chennai - 600058     

    (By Adv.Paulochan Antony.P)                             -          Opposite parties

2. Travelsees

    tripOdeal.com

    Email:     Mob – 08069-335-000

    (Deleted from party array)

O R D E R

By Smt. Vidya.A, Member

1.  Pleadings of the complainant in brief

      On 3^rd October 2022, the complainant booked an air ticket in Go First Air lines for the sector Cochin/Mumbai for his son to travel on 3^rd November 2022. Due to some technical issues on the part of the Bank portal, he got payment failure message which made him book another ticket to travel on the same day. The Airlines refunded Rs.7376/- after deducting Rs.422/- to Tripodeal and they transferred Rs.3092/- only to his credit card account.

          The complainant initiated another transaction on the belief that the failed transaction will never take place. Due to the deficiency in service on the part of the bank, the amount was deducted twice. The bank has to refund the full amount paid by him to the Travel Agency. ie Rs.7798/- as against Rs.3092/- which the travel agency refunded.

          So he approached this Commission for an order directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.24,076/- for the deficiency in service and mental agony suffered by the complainant.

2.  Complaint was admitted. The Commission discussed the necessity of having OP2 in the party array and the complainant submitted that he would seek resource only against OP1. Hence OP2 was deleted from the party array.

3.  OP1 appeared and filed their version. They admit that the complainant had booked an air ticket through the 1^st OP bank and the 1^st attempt failed.

           The complainant admitted that he carried out further attempt after getting the “payment failed” message in which the 1^st OP has not billed                 the amount to the card holder. Subsequently complainant    has initiated transaction bearing Ref. No. Travelsees DELHI-IND Ref. No.MT222770276000010000765 and Travelsees DELHI-IND Ref.No.MT222770276000010000766 for an amount of Rs.7798/- each time. Both the transactions were successful and the 2^nd OP had claimed the fund successfully. Since the transactions were successful, refund is subjected to the Terms and conditions of the 2^nd opposite party.

4.  The 1^st opposite party had sent message to the customer’s registered mobile number about the decline of the first attempt transaction dated 3/10/22 20:51:00 Hrs. Subsequently the complainant initiated next transaction and the same was notified with a transaction message at 21:06:00 hrs on 3/10/22 which shows “Transaction Alert : INR 7798.00/- has been spent on your YES BANK Credit Card ending with 0854 at Travelsees on 3/10/22 at 9:06:32 pm. Available Balance                        INR 49,202/-. In case of suspicious transaction, to block your card,                         SMS BLKCC[Space][Last 4 digit card number] to 9840909000 from your registered mobile number.”

5.  Even after getting the message of this transaction, the complainant negligently made further successful transaction (Third attempt of Rs.7798/- at 21:13:00 hrs on 3/10/22 and the same has been communicated by the 1^st OP with a message. The complainant ignored the advice in the message to block the card in case of doubtful transaction, so that further transaction and the monetary loss could be avoided.

          The applicable refund of Rs.7376/- has been processed and the refund was directly given to the Travel Agents (2^nd OP) and they have credited a sum of Rs.3092/- to the complainant’s credit card account appropriating the balance amount to the charge/fees. The 1^st OP is not responsible for the alleged loss and the complainant has to seek remedy from the 2^nd OP. There is no deficiency in service on the part of this opposite party and they are not liable to compensate the complainant and the complaint has to be dismissed.

6.  From the pleadings of both parties, the following issues arise for consideration.

1. Whether the loss of money as alleged by the complainant is attributable to any fault of the opposite parties ?
2. Whether there is any deficiency in service/unfair trade practice  on the part of the opposite parties ?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed ?
4. Reliefs as to cost and compensation.

7.  After framing of issues, the case was posted for Pre-trial steps. As there was no representation for the complainant, it was closed and posted for proof affidavit of the complainant. But the complainant was continuously absent and the case was taken for orders based on merit.

In the absence of the proof affidavit and supporting evidence, the complainant failed to prove his case.

          In the result, the complaint is dismissed.

     Pronounced in open court on this the 24^th day of  August, 2023.

                                                                                             Sd/-

                                                                                     Vinay Menon V

                                                                                President                                              

                                                             Sd/-

                    Vidya.A

                                  Member   

APPENDIX

Documents marked from the side of the complainant: Nil

Documents marked from the side of opposite parties:  Nil

Witness examined from the complainant’s side: Nil

Witness examined from the opposite parties side: NIL

Cost: Nil

NB: Parties are directed to take back all extra set of documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.