An unauthorized cancellation of return flight tickets by a travel agent constitutes a deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, rendering the agent liable for mental agony and inconvenience, notwithstanding the absence of proven actual financial loss.

ORDER

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI. B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR: PRESIDENT

This is a complaint filed under S.17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2. The complainant decided to go for a trip to Frankfurt, Germany and other parts of Europe along with his wife and three children, for which the complainant booked 5 Qutar Air Ways flight tickets through opposite parties 1 to 3 from Kochi to Frankfurt for their journey to Frankfurt on 20.05.2013 and another 5 Qutar Air Ways flight tickets for their return journey from Venice to Kochi on 30.05.2013, after making payment of the necessary fare as demanded by opposite parties 1 to 3. When the complainant and his family reached the International Airport, Kochi, the officials of Qatar Airways verified the entire travel documents, including the return tickets, and thereafter, they issued the boarding pass to the complainant and his family. The opposite parties were well aware that the complainant and his family would not have been allowed to travel to Frankfurt without valid return tickets.

3. When the complainant and his family reached Venice Airport on 30.05.2013 for their return journey from Venice to Kochi via Doha, the complainant was informed by the 4th and 5th opposite parties that the return tickets were cancelled by the opposite parties 1 to 3. The complainant did not give any instruction to opposite parties 1 to 3 to cancel the return tickets. Even though the complainant made repeated requests to the officials of the 4th and 5th opposite parties, they failed to make necessary arrangements for the journey of the complainant and his family from Venice to Kochi via Doha as already agreed. Thereafter, the officials of opposite parties 4 and 5 informed the complainant that the complainant and his family could be provided return tickets from Venice to Delhi via Doha. They also agreed to accommodate the complainant and his family in the flight to Kochi/Calicut/Thiruvananthapuram from Doha. Since the complainant and his family had no other option, they were compelled to board the flight provided by opposite parties 4 and 5 from Venice to Doha.

4. When the complainant and his family reached Doha Airport, the officials of the the opposite parties 4 and 5 informed the complainant that the complainant and his family could not be accommodated in the flight to Kochi/Calicut/Thiruvananthauram due to non-availability of space. The officials of the 4th and 5th opposite parties further informed the complainant that the 4th and 5th opposite parties could arrange flights from Doha to Delhi and from Delhi to Kochi. Accordingly, the complainant and his family were compelled to travel from Doha to Delhi by the flight arranged by the officials of the 4th and 5th opposite parties, and thus they reached Delhi Airport on 31.05.2013 at 8.00 a.m. At Delhi Airport, the officials of the 4th and 5th opposite parties informed the complainant that the flight to Kochi was fully reserved and hence, the complainant and his family could take the option of getting a flight to Mumbai from Delhi, which the complainant did not accept. The complainant and his family had to spend long hours in the transit area of Delhi Airport even without food and proper accommodation. The complainant and his family had to reside in a lodge in Delhi on that date. On 01.06.2013, the complainant and his family had taken separate flight tickets from Delhi to Kochi at the expense of the complainant and reached Kochi at 10.30 a.m. The complainant had to spend an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards lodging and travelling, including the flight ticket charges.

5. As per the tickets already book