Back
UTTAR PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUCKNOW
Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.C. Bhargava, President &
Mr. D.D. Bahuguna, Member
JANTA TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED—Appellant
versus
NAMITA NIGAM—Respondent
Appeal No. 1018/SC of 1992—Decided on 22.1.2001
The liability of the travel agent in refunding the fare for an unutilized air ticket is contingent upon the airline being made a party to the proceedings.
Headnote:
refund - air ticket - The court considered the liability of the travel agent in refunding the fare for an unutilized air ticket purchased through them, and the necessity of making the airline a party to the proceedings for claiming the refund.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant filed a complaint for refund of excess fare charged for an unutilized air ticket from London to New York, purchased through the opposite party. The opposite party did not file a written statement, and the District Forum decreed the claim for the complainant.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order of the District Forum, and dismissed the complaint, stating that the airline should have been made a party to the proceedings for the liability of refunding the fare.
Issues: Liability of the travel agent in refunding the fare for an unutilized air ticket and the necessity of making the airline a party to the proceedings for claiming the refund.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the travel agent's liability for refunding the fare is contingent upon the airline being made a party to the proceedings, as the travel agent merely assists the traveler in obtaining a ticket from the airline.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the judgment and order of the District Forum were set aside, and the complaint was dismissed with no order as to the costs.
Mr. Justice K.C. Bhargava, President—This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 10.8.1992 passed by District Consumer Forum, Lucknow in Complaint Case No. 134 of 1990.
2. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant has filed the complaint for refund of excess amount of fare charged from the complainant for air ticket from London to New York. This was on account of the unutilized flight ticket purchased through the opposite party for a sum of Rs. 16,306/- at Lucknow on 25.11.1989. According to the complainant he started from New Delhi by Air from Delhi to London. Because the visa was not given to the complainant for New York and hence she could not continue the journey from London to New York. The refund is claimed for this journey.
3. The opposite party did not file any written statement inspite of service on it. The opposite party had also taken time for filing written statement, but did not file its version.
4. The learned District Forum, after considering the case of the complainant, decreed the claim for Rs. 11,000/- against the opposite party.
5. Aggrieved against this order, the opposite party has come in appeal and has challenged the correctness of the order.
6. None of the parties were present when the appeal was taken up for hearing even though they were sent notice through postal service stamps.
7. The appellant in the grounds of appeal has alleged that the Air India has not been made a party to the proceedings and the ticket was purchased from Air India, which is liable to refund the amount. It is true that the travel agent merely assists the traveller to take a ticket from the Airlines. In the present case the opposite party-complainant obtained a ticket from the appellant for Air India. Unless the Air India had been made a party to the proceedings, no liability can be passed on to the opposite party. The opposite party merely charges his commission which is paid to it by the Airlines. The entire amount of the ticket is transmitted to the concerned Airlines and no part of it is retained by the travel agent, opposite party. Therefore, in face of these matters, it is not possible to decree the claim against the opposite party. The complainant should have made Airlines a party and then the Airlines would have been liable to refund the fare claimed by the complainant for unutilised ticket.
8. Therefore, the judgment and order of the District Forum are not correct and are liable to be set aside.
ORDER
The appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of the learned District Forum are set aside and complaint is dismissed.
No order as to the costs.
Appeal allowed.
–
