Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/375/2016

Ranjeet Singh son of Sh. S.Dalal Singh 2. Mrs. Shavinder kaur wife of Ranjeet Singh3. Raivathjeet Singh son of Sh. Ranjeet Singh All resident of House No. 1648,Sector-22-B, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Air India - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Deepak Aggarwal Adv.

31 May 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	375 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	27.05.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	31.05.2017

 

 

 

 

1]  Ranjeet Singh son of Sh.S.Dalal Singh,

2]  Mrs.Shavinder Kaur wife of Sh.Ranjeet Singh,

3]  Raivathjeet Singh son of Sh.Ranjeet Singh,

All residents of House No.1648, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh.       

             …..Complainants

Versus

Air India, Office at SCO No.162-164, Ground Floor, Dakshin Marg, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh 160022 through its Director.

                               ….. Opposite Party

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

                                SH.RAVINDER SINGH              MEMBER 

 

Argued by: Sh.Deepak Aggarwal, Counsel for complainants.

Sh.S.R.Chaudhari, Counsel for the OP

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          Briefly stated, the complainants booked three air tickets from Millan to Chandigarh for 26.1.2016.  Accordingly, the complainant boarded the flight of Opposite Party on 26.1.2016 and reached New Delhi on 27.1.2016, but since the said flight was late by five hours from the scheduled time, resultantly, the complainants missed New Delhi to Chandigarh flight of Opposite Party.  It is averred that the Opposite Party failed to show the courtesy of making alternative arrangements from New Delhi to Chandigarh nor any arrangements were made for back stay in any hotel in New Delhi. It is also averred that the baby child i.e. complainant No.3 was suffering from high fever on 27.1.2016, but no medical aid was provided by the Opposite Party.  It is stated that the complainants had to run around to get the air tickets booked from New Delhi to Chandigarh through another airline, which was never a part of their itinerary, but there was no flight and the complainants had to strand at Delhi Airport. It is also stated that the complainants had requested the OPs numerous times to make an alternate arrangement to book some other flight from New Delhi to Chandigarh as well as for refund and were duly apprised that their return on 27.1.2016 is extremely important, but Opposite Party did not pay any heed.  Ultimately, the complainants had to travel by taxi from New Delhi to Chandigarh by paying taxi charges of Rs.6500/- from their own (Ann.C-4) and bear the discomfort of long travel etc. It is pleaded that thereafter the complainants visited the office of Opposite Party for redressal of their grievances, but to no avail. Hence, this complaint has been filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party.

 

2]       The Opposite Party has filed reply stating that this Forum do not have the territorial jurisdiction to try & adjudicate the matter since the air-tickets in question were booked on website at Milan and made the payment at Milan.  It is stated that since the flight was delayed for 5 hrs from Milan itself, so the complainants connecting flight AI 463 from New Delhi to Chandigarh was missed. It is stated that the paxes were escorted and were given the option to travel on next day’s flight i.e. the complainants would have been given night stay at AI’s cost, but the same was refused, so it is incorrect that the complainants were not offered accommodation to stay at New Delhi.  It is also stated that Ann.R-2/B indicates that full refund as per rules was also authorised though it could be paid only at Milan where  the tickets were purchased and these questions were to be raised at New Delhi and ought to have been settled at New Delhi. It is pleaded that the refund of unutilized tickets between New Delhi to Chandigarh will no doubt be refunded by Air India, Milan, as the tickets were booked and paid for at Milan.  It is also pleaded that the refund of taxi charges i.e. Rs.6500/- which arose due to missing the flight could be considered in the context of complete adjudication of the complaint. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, the Opposite Party has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

3]       Rebuttal has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of the reply.

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the entire record.

 

6]       It is an admitted case that the complainant booked three air tickets from Milan to Chandigarh for 26.1.2016 with Opposite Party.  Further admitted that the flight booked by the complainants for 26.1.2016 from Milan to Delhi, got delayed by 5 hours, as a result, the complainants missed their connecting flight to be boarded at New Delhi for Chandigarh.

 

7]       In the absence of any cogent evidence of the OPs, it is also a proven fact that when the complainants were not accommodated, on the same day they opted to travel through Taxi from New Delhi to Chandigarh and spent an extra amount of Rs.6500/- for the journey, which definitely is an additional burden suffered for the inaction of the Opposite Party. 

8]       Perusal of the reply of the Opposite Party along with Ann.R-1, R-1/A and R-2/B, reveals that the complainants are duly entitled for full refund of airfare of unutilized tickets between Delhi to Chandigarh. 

 

9]       It is clear on record that despite admitting their liability qua refund of the amount for unutilized tickets from New Delhi to Chandigarh, the Opposite Party did not pay even a single penny to the complainants, which forced them to file the present complaint, which in again an additional burden put on them apart from suffering mental as well as physical harassment.

 

10]      The stand of the Opposite Party that since the complainants booked the flight from Milan and missed their connecting flight at New Delhi, so they are entitled to claim the refund from Milan Office only and also raising an objection regarding jurisdiction of this Forum, are altogether untenable.  As the final destination of the booked flight was Chandigarh and also the Opposite Party is having Branch Office at Chandigarh, therefore, this Forum has the jurisdiction to try & adjudicate the present complaint.

 

11]      In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party is writ large.  Therefore, the present complaint deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed against Opposite Party. The Opposite Party is directed as under –

1. To refund the amount of unutilized airfare to the complainants for the route New Delhi to Chandigarh;
2. To pay consolidated amount of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental tension, agony, harassment suffered by the complainants on account of deficiency in service of OP.
3. To pay the taxi fare of Rs.6500/- to the complainants for New Delhi to Chandigarh
4. To pay litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-.

 

         This order shall be complied with by the Opposite Party within 30 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall also be liable to pay interest @9% p.a. on the amount as at sub-para [ii] & [iii] above from the date of filing this complaint, till its realization, apart from complying with directions as at sub-para [i] & [iv] above.

        Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

31^st May, 2017                                                               Sd/-

                                                                                                               

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER