DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION BARNALA, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : CC/170/2019

Date of Institution : 16.10.2019

Date of Decision : 27.07.2020

Sukhwinder Singh aged about 61 years son of Ajmer Singh resident of # 78, 22 Acre Scheme, Barnala, Tehsil and District Barnala.                             …Complainant

Versus

1. Gupta Tour and Travels through its Proprietor Sanjiv Kumar, Near Bhagat Singh Chowk, Sadar Bazaar, Barnala, Tehsil and District Barnala.

2. Jet Airways, Registered Office G-11/12, Outer Circle, G-Block, Connaught Circus, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 through its Authorized Signatory/Responsible Person.

…Opposite Parties

Complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present: Sh. Dhiraj Kumar counsel for complainant.

Sh. Varinder Kumar Goyal counsel for opposite party No. 1.

Opposite party No. 2 deleted.

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Kuljit Singh : President

2. Sh. Tejinder Singh Bhangu : Member

(ORDER BY KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT):

    The complainant Sukhwinder Singh has filed the present complaint under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended up to date) against Gupta Tour and Travels, Barnala and another. (in short the opposite parties). 

2. The facts leading to the present complaint as stated by the complainant are that the complainant wants to go Toronto to attend the family function of his relative. So, he approached the opposite party No. 1 on 9.4.2019 for booking of flight from New Delhi to Toronto and from Toronto to New Delhi and paid Rs. 72,500/- for price of tickets including commission of opposite party No. 1.  

3. It is further alleged that the ticket of opposite party No. 2 was booked by the opposite party No. 1 for 24.4.2019 bearing flight No. 9W234 from New Delhi to Toronto and for 10.10.2019 bearing flight No. 9W233 from Toronto to New Delhi and copy of E-ticket was supplied by the opposite party No. 1 to the complainant. 

4. It was further alleged that after some days earlier from 24.4.2019 the complainant approached the opposite party No. 1 for confirmation of tickets and flight and then opposite party No. 1 told the complainant that his flight is canceled and amount of booking/ticket price alongwith commission amounting to Rs. 72,500/- will be refunded by him to the complainant. Then the complainant immediately approached another agent for booking of flight for Canada and paid Rs. 1,28,000/- to that Agent who got confirmed the booking through flight No. LH761 Lufthansa dated 30.4.2019 from Delhi to Frankfurt and flight No. LH470 Lufthansa from Frankfurt to Toronto (transfer flight instead of direct flight) and flight bearing No. AC042 of Air Canada from Toronto to Delhi for 27.8.2019. Thereafter, the complainant approached the opposite party No. 1 many times to refund the amount of Rs. 72,500/- but they linger on the matter on one pretext or the other. In this regard a legal notice dated 26.9.2019 was also sent to the complainant through his counsel to the opposite party No. 1 but to no effect. The act of the opposite party No. 1 is clear cut deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.-

1) The opposite party may be directed to make the payment of Rs. 72,500/- which was paid by the complainant to the opposite party No. 1, alongwith interest.  

2) To pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for humiliation and harassment.           

3) To pay Rs. 15,000/- as litigation expenses.  

4) Any other relief this Forum deems fit. 

5. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite party No. 1 filed written version taking legal objections interalia on the ground that suddenly on 17.4.2019 Jet Airways -4.79% shut down its operations temporarily on 17.4.2019 which affected 20,000 employees and more than 60,000 people indirectly. In this regard news were published in all newspapers of India an abroad. The opposite party No. 1 informed the complainant that opposite party No. 2 shut down its operations on 17.4.2019 so his ticket automatically canceled and he can arrange substitute arrangement and also informed that as per policy of Jet Airways request for refund has been sent to the Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited, Mumbai and refund procedure is under process with the Jet Airways. So, there is no fault of opposite party No. 1 and he cooperate with the complainant. Further, any refunds that were due till 17.4.2019 were already processed by the Jet Airways via IATA. However on the next day IATA unplugged Jet Airways from the billing platform which meant there was no way that Jet Airways was going to be able to refund tickets to those who they owe money. Then Jet Airways has made a backend platform which is accessible only to travel Agents and those who have booked tickets via a travel agent need to reach out to their travel Agents including their online travel agents to claim their refunds. But inspite of reply of notice issued by the complainant the complainant have not impleaded Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited, Mumbai as opposite party so present complaint is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties. Further, they objected the present complaint on the grounds of not come to the Forum with clean hands, no locus standi, no jurisdiction and abuse of process of law. 

6. On merits, the opposite party No. 1 submitted that the complainant booked Air Ticket for travel date 24.4.2019 from Delhi to Toronto through Akbar Online Booking Co. Pvt Ltd. Mumbai. Further, the opposite party No. 1 arranged the said ticket from Akbar Online Booking Co. Pvt Ltd., Mumbai and delivered the same to the complainant. It is denied that thereafter complainant approached the opposite party No. 1. Further, in reply to other paras of complaint the opposite party No. 1 reiterated the contents as mentioned in the preliminary objections so there is no need to repeat the same. 

7. It is further submitted that opposite party No. 1 already transferred the amount to Akbar Online Booking Co. Pvt Ltd Mumbai vide invoice dated 5.2.2019. They further submitted that tickets booked on 2.2.2019 had been refunded by the opposite party No. 2 vide credit note dated 23.3.2019 of Rs. 37,470/- in the name of Harjot Preet Singh and tickets booked on 2.2.2019 in the name of Arshpreet Singh also refunded by the opposite party No. 2 on 23.3.2019. Further, reply of notice has already been sent by the opposite party No. 1 to the complainant. Rest of averments of the complaint are denied by the opposite party No. 1. They further submitted that the complainant is not entitled to get any amount from the answering opposite party. However, the refund process if pending with Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited, Mumbai and with the Jet Airways opposite party No. 2. Rest of paras of the complaint are denied by the opposite party No. 1. Lastly, opposite party No. 1 prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint till the final settlement of refund process is pending with Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited, Mumbai and Jet Airways opposite party No. 2. 

8. The opposite party No. 2 has been deleted from the array of the opposite parties vide order dated 3.12.2019 on the statement of the learned counsel for the complainant made on the same day. 

9. In support of his complaint, complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit as Ex.C-1, copy of E-ticket Ex.C-2, copy of E-ticket dated 19.4.2019 Ex.C-3, copy of legal notice Ex.C-4, copy of postal receipt Ex.C-5 and closed the evidence. 

10. To rebut the case of the complainant, the opposite party No. 1 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sanjeev Kumar Gupta Ex.OP-1/1, copy of guidelines dated 20.6.2019 Ex.OP-1/2, copy of list of creditors dated 20.10.2019 Ex.OP-1/3, reply of legal notice dated 10.10.2019 Ex.OP-1/4, copies of postal receipts Ex.OP-1/5 and Ex.OP-1/6, copies of postal track consignment Ex.OP-1/7 and Ex.OP-1/8 and closed the evidence.   

11. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through record. Written arguments were also filed by opposite party No. 1.

12. It is admitted fact between the parties that complainant booked the Air Tickets for the flights from New Delhi to Toronto and from Toronto to New Delhi for 24.4.2019 and paid Rs. 72,500/- to the opposite party No. 1. It is also admitted by the opposite party No. 1 that the flight of the complainant was canceled as opposite party No. 2. i.e. Jet Airways shut down its operations temporarily on 17.4.2019. Now the complainant wants to refund his amount of Rs. 72,500/- alongwith interest. 

13. The plea of the opposite party No. 1 is that he booked the tickets of the complainant through Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited and transferred the amount of the complainant to that company and also sent request for refund to the Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited, 1st Floor, 62, Janjikar Street, Mumbai, Maharashtra (27) Pin-400003 and refund procedure is under process with the Jet Airways i.e. opposite party No. 2. But the complainant has not impleaded Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited in the array of the opposite parties and also got deleted the name of the opposite party No. 2 from the array of the opposite parties through his counsel vide his statement dated 3.12.2019. As now the refund procedure of the complainant is between these two parties and amount is pending with the opposite party No. 2 who will refund the same to the opposite party No. 2 when refund process will be completed so  both these parties are necessary parties in the present complaint. We have perused the list of creditors Ex.OP-1/3 in which the opposite party No. 2 refunded some amount to Akbar Travels of India Private Limited so amount of the complainant will also be refunded through Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited so it is a necessary party. Further, we have perused reply of legal notice dated 10.10.2019 Ex.OP-1/4 in which also the complainant informed the complainant that his tickets were booked through Akbar Online Booking Company Private Limited and amount of the complainant also paid to that company but even the complainant has not impleaded that company in the present complaint in the array of the opposite parties. The complainant initially impleaded Jet Airways with which the amount of the complainant is lying as opposite party No. 2 but later on this party also got deleted through his counsel. Even after filing the written version by the opposite party No. 1 the complainant failed to move any application to implead both these parties in the present complaint. In our view both these parties are necessary parties for the decision of the present complaint and as the complainant has not impleaded both these parties in the present complaint so complaint is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of the necessary parties. 

14. In view of the above discussion as the complaint is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of necessary parties, so the same is dismissed. However, no order as to costs or compensation. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to records after its due compliance.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

  27th Day of July 2020

 

 

            (Kuljit Singh)

            President

 

              (Tejinder Singh Bhangu)

Member