Skip to main content

Travel agency cancels ticket on its own, fined Rs 57,000

 Cancelling of an international flight ticket on it own has cost online travel agency Make My Trip India Rs 57,000. The district consumer disputes redressal forum (Chennai north) fined the agency for negligence and deficiency in service.

M Kabilavanan said he had booked return tickets from Chennai to Colombo for his uncle D Kumaravelu and aunt K Vijaykumari. On August 10, 2011 they went to board the flight from Colombo but Kumaravelu was not given a boarding pass. Officials told him the agency had cancelled the ticket. They stayed back in Colombo and booked tickets for the next day, spending an extra 15,000, said Kabilavanan.

The travel agency who apologized for the inconvenience and said it was trying to trace the number through which the cancellation request was made. But the agency neither provided a solution nor compensated him for the extra expenses, said Kabilavanan. He then moved the forum stating the travel agency had committed fraud.

Make My Trip India said the allegations were "misconceived and vexatious". While booking the tickets, the customer had entered into an agreement that any dispute had to be settled at New Delhi and the district forum did not have the jurisdiction to try the case. Denying that its travel agent had cancelled the ticket, it said the booking amount had been refunded.

The bench comprising president R Mohandoss and member T Kalaiyarasi said as the travel agency had its office in Nungambakkam, it was within the ambit of the forum. The agency had failed to provide the phone number which had requested cancellation of the ticket. There was no affidavit of the travel agent stating he had cancelled the ticket only after a request from Kabilavanan.

Concluding there was negligence and deficiency in service, the forum directed the agencyto pay 30,000 as compensation, 15,000 for refund of air fare, 10,000 as the incidental expenses and 2,000 as case cost.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Travel-agency-cancels-ticket-on-its-own-fined-Rs-57000/articleshow/30592172.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/
Post a Comment
Read more

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...
Post a Comment
Read more