State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Makemytrip (India) Pvt Ltd vs Mahesh Basavraj Shedbal on 12 December, 2018
A/16/359
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
Appeal No. A/16/359
(Arisen out of order dated 10/09/2015 passed in complaint No.40/2014 by Addl.
District Thane)
Makemytrip (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Corporate office at UG-7, IDI Mall,
Shivaji Palace Complex,
Rajouri Garden, New Delhi - 110 027 &
Corporate Office at Tower-A, SP Infocity,
Plot No.243, Udyog Vihar, Phase-I,
Gurgaon - 122 016. ...........Appellant (s)
Versus
1. Mahesh Basavraj Shedbal
Resident of Flat No.201, Building No.3,
Sector-6, Kesar Harmony CHS Ltd.,
Kharghar, Navi Mumbai-410 210.
2. Archana Mahesh Shedbal
Resident of Flat No.201, Building No.3,
Sector-6, Kesar Harmony CHS Ltd.,
Kharghar, Navi Mumbai-410 210. ............Respondent (s)
BEFORE:
Justice A.P. Bhangale PRESIDENT
A. K. Zade MEMBER
For the Mrs.Bindu Jain, Advocate h/f.
Appellant: Mrs.Anita Marathe, Advocate for
appellant.
For the Respondent No.1-Mr.Mahesh Shedbal
Respondent: present for both respondents.
ORAL ORDER
Per Justice Mr.A.P. Bhangale, Hon'ble President Mrs.Bindu Jain, Advocate h/f. Mrs.Anita Marathe, Advocate present for appellant with authority letter. Respondent No.1-Mr.Mahesh Shedbal present for both respondents.
2. By this appeal appellant has questioned validity and legality of the judgment and award dated 10/09/2015 passed in complaint No.40/2014 by Page 1 of 3 A/16/359 the Learned Addl. District Forum, Thane.
3. Brief facts are that complainants had bought e-tickets for travel from Mumbai to San Francisco and return back to Mumbai. E-tickets which were issued however mentioned the itinerary and reservation details of different flights which are mentioned as Non-Stop Flight from Mumbai- Munich on 21/03/2013 at 01.40 hrs. reaching Munich at 05.55 hrs. on 21/03/2013 and from Munich at 11.50 hrs on 21/03/2013 reaching Toronto at 15.55 hrs. on the same day and then from Toronto at 18.15 hrs. on 21/03/2013 reaching San Francisco at 20.56 hrs. on the same day. Then while returning from San Francisco at 13.00 hrs. on 08/06/2013 to London (Heathrow) Airport at 07.10 hrs. on 09/06/2013 and then from London at 09.50 hrs. on 09/06/2013 reaching Frankfurt at 12.25 hrs. on the same day and from Frankfurt at 13.35 hrs on 09/06/2013 reaching Mumbai on 10/06/2013 at 01.00 hrs.
4. Grievance of the complainants was that while availing said e-tickets they were not permitted to board the plane by Lufthansa Airways on the ground that they had no transit visa to travel from one Airport to another in London. Learned District Forum it appears that on the ground that opponent did not appear for oral argument decided the case in favour of the complainants. Grievance of the appellant is that e-tickets issued to the complainants contained conditions which ought to have been read by the complainants while availing of e-tickets services from the appellant. Complainants were prevented from boarding the flight by and on behalf of Lufthansa Airways which was not impleaded as party in the complaint. The opponent/appellant has already raised this question of non-joinder of Lufthansa Airways who according to complainants refused to allow Boarding-Pass to the complainants. Merely, on the ground that opponent did not appear at the final hearing nor file documents, the case was Page 2 of 3 A/16/359 decided culminating in award which is impugned herein.
5. On behalf of complainants, it is submitted that recently the appellant has incorporated the condition in the e-ticket that transit visa when required on the itinerary must be arranged. Be that as it may. Considering the nature of e-tickets that name of Lufthansa Airways does figure in the air-tickets regarding travel from London to Frankfurt and then from Frankfurt to Mumbai by Non-Stop Flight, it would be proper if the Lufthansa Airways is impleaded as party to the complaint proceeding since it is essential for just decision in the case. After complainants joins Lufthansa Airways as proper party to the complaint proceeding, the Learned District Forum may proceed to decide the complaint giving opportunity to the added party to file their written version, affidavits in evidence, etc. We therefore, set aside the impugned order and direct the parties to appear before the District Forum. Complainants are permitted to effect amendment in the complaint for addition of Lufthansa Airways as party as also pray for reliefs against them. We further direct the Learned District Forum to decide the case on merits in accordance with the law as early as possible after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties. Amount deposited by the appellant shall remain at the disposal of the District Forum till disposal of the complaint on merits. Parties to appear before the Learned District Forum on 21/01/2019. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties as also to the concerned District Forum. Pronounced Dated 12th December 2018.
[ Justice A.P. Bhangale ] PRESIDENT [ A. K. Zade ] MEMBER dd.
Page 3 of 3