Haryana

StateCommission

A/62/2018

INDIGO CENTRAL WING AND ANOTHER - Complainant(s)

Versus

PARDEEP KUMAR JINDAL AND OTHERS - Opp.Party(s)

MITTUL MEHRA

22 Nov 2018

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

                                                         First Appeal No.62 of 2018

                                                 Date of Institution: 16.01.2018

                                                               Date of Decision: 22.11.2018

1.      Indigo Central Wing Ground Floor, Thapar House, 124-Janpath, New Delhi through its Authorized Signatory.

2.      Indigo, Level 1, Tower C, Global Business Park, Mehrauli Gurgaon road, Gurgaon, through its Authorised Signatory.

…..Appellants

Versus

1.      Pardeep Kumar Jindal, S/o Shri Raj Kumar Jindal, R/o 21-M.C. Colony, Fatehabad Tehsil and Distt. Fatehabad.

2.      Rachna Jindal, W/o Pardeep Jindal, R/o 21-MC Colony, Fatehabad Tehsil and Distt. Fatehabad.

3.      Rakesh Kumar Jindal, S/o Shri Raj Kumar, R/o 21-M.C. Colony, Fatehabad Tehsil and Distt. Fatehabad.

4.      Saloni Jindal, W/o Rakesh Jindal, R/o 21-M.C.Colony, Fatehabad Tehsil and Distt. Fatehabad.

                   …..Respondents

CORAM:             Mr. Ram Singh Chaudhary, Judicial Member.

Present:              Shri Mittul Mehra, Advocate for appellants.

                             Mr. B.S.Mittal, Advocate for the respondents.

                                                   O R D E R

RAM SINGH CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

          The brief facts given rise for the disposal of the present appeal are that, complainants planned a trip to Bombay alongwith family and they booked seven return air tickets from New Delhi to Mumbai for Wednesday i.e. 22.02.2017 of Flight No.6E-171 and return tickets from Mumabi to New Delhi for Sunday i.e. 26.03.2017 of flight No.6E-248 through Yatra.com of Airline Indigo. The total amount of Rs.26,687/- was charged from  them. The tickets were confirmed by yatra.com vide e-mail dated 31.01.2017.  On 22.02.2017 after getting the boarding passes from counter NO.D, employee of Ops instructed the complainants to go to counter No.H  instead of counter No.D due to rush at counter No.D for depositing their luggage.  The complainants standing the line for 15 to 20 minutes, the employee of the Ops again instructed the complainants to go to counter No.D to deposit their luggage as boarding passes were issued to them through counter No.D and in this process 30 to 35 minutes of the complainants were wasted by the employees of the Ops.  The complainants again reached at counter No.D  with their luggage, but, employee attending the counter No.D informed them that they have become late and their luggage cannot be deposited and they can board on the airplane without their luggage. And if they still want to deposit their luggage, they will have to pay Rs.64,000/- extra for the luggage or the complainants can take the next flight to Mumbai after paying the difference of fare with the next flight. The complainants cancelled their trip to Mumbai and returned back to their home. The complainants requested the Ops to refund the amount charged at the time of booking of air tickets but all in vain.  Thus there was deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part on the part of the Ops.

2.      In its written version, apart from raising preliminary objections about the maintainability of the complaint, locus standi, accruing cause of action etc. were also raised and requested to dismiss the complaint.

3.      On merits, it was alleged that the complainants booked an air ticket from Delhi to Mumbai for travel on 22.02.2017 on Indigo flight No.6E-171. As per article 8.1 of the terms and conditions Indigo recommends that customers report for check-in at least two hours prior to the departure of the scheduled flight.  Indigo reserves the right to cancel a Customer’s reservation if he/she does not comply with the check-in timelines. As per the above article check-in closes 45 minutes prior to the scheduled departure of the flight. Failure to complete the check-in formalities within the stipulate3 time limit would result in forfeiture of the booking amount. The booking would be declared a “No Show” and the customers would not be entitled to a refund or a credit.  However, only the PSF and UDF may be refunded o the customer upon request made by the customer to IndiGo.   As per the terms and conditions the complaianants were required to report to the check-in counter for IndiGo flight before 45 minutes prior to the schedule time of departure of his flight i.e. 5.30 a.m. As per the record the complainant failed to report to the ckeck-in counter for indigo flight No.6E-171 before its closure.  As per the terms and conditions, the ticket of the complainant’s amount was forfeited. The e-mail sent by the complainants on 23.02.2017 were replied by the Ops vide e-mail dated 22.02.2017. Thus there was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps.

4.      After hearing both the parties, District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Fatehabad (In short “District Forum”) allowed the complaint  vide impugned order dated 13.12.2017 is as under :-

“Complainants are entitled for getting refund of amount of booking of air tickets i.e. Rs.36,687/- charged from the complainants after deducting an amount of Rs.4998/- in case already refunded to the complainants by the OPs alongwith Rs.5000/- as compensation.”

5.      Feeling aggrieved therefrom, O.Ps.-appellants have preferred this appeal.

6.      This argument has been advanced by Sh.Mittul Mehra learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. B.S.Mittal, the learned counsel for the respondents. With his kind assistance the entire records as well as the original record of the District Forum including whatever the evidence has been led on behalf of  parties had also been properly perused and examined.

7.      It is not disputed that the complainants booked air tickets with the O.ps. for their family members.  It is also not disputed that the flight was from Delhi to Mumbai and Mumbai to Delhi.  It is also not disputed that the boarding pass was issued to the complainants.

8.      As per the travel schedule the complainants had visited the air port.  The boarding pass Annexure C-2 had also been issued by the officials of the O.Ps. However due to the fault of the officials of the present appellants, the complainants could not board the flight in time, as such, whatever the expenditure have been borne by the complainants, the complainants are legally entitled to recover the same as it was the sole responsibility of the officials of the appellants, once the boarding pass was issued to allow them to board the flight.   Hence, appeal as such is devoid of merits stands dismissed while maintaining the impugned order dated 13.12.2017 passed by the learned District Forum.

9.      The statutory amount of Rs.20844/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellants against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

November 22nd, 2018                            Ram Singh Chaudhary,                                                                          Judicial Member                                                                                       Addl.Bench                 

S.K