Ernakulam District Commission Holds Malaysia Airlines Liable For Deficiency In Service
The Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kerala, headed by D.B. Banu as President, alongside members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia. T.N. held Malaysia Airlines liable for unfair trade practices by refusing to provide a refund for the canceled trip due to COVID-19. Brief Facts of the Case The complaint, filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act...
The Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kerala, headed by D.B. Banu as President, alongside members V. Ramachandran and Sreevidhia. T.N. held Malaysia Airlines liable for unfair trade practices by refusing to provide a refund for the canceled trip due to COVID-19.
Brief Facts of the Case
The complaint, filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019, involves Malaysian Airlines conducting promotions through various channels and an authorized travel service provider. Influenced by the promotions, the complainant engaged with both parties for a hassle-free journey to Australia and paid the amount for the ticket expenses to the travel service provider. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, following a subsequent lockdown and a halt in aviation services, the airlines canceled the scheduled trip. Despite the complainant's pleas, no refund was initiated. The complainant claimed that the opposing parties are obliged to refund the amount promptly, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices causing mental agony and financial loss.
Observations by the Commission
The commission observed that the opposite parties assured the complainant a smooth journey, leading the complainant to subsequently pay the tour's ticket amount to the service provider. However, the airlines canceled the tickets booked by the complainant due to the COVID -19 pandemic. In accordance with aviation norms and European regulation EC 261/2004, passengers have the right to a full ticket refund within seven days if they choose not to travel due to a flight cancellation. This entitlement also extends to non-refundable tickets, providing a refund for unused transportation in the event of both flight cancellation and subsequent passenger trip cancellation. In this case, despite the complainant's requests, the airlines and the travel service provider did not take steps to refund the money, going against the established aviation norms. The bench concluded that the opposite parties' refusal to refund the ticket amount constitutes a service deficiency, warranting a refund and compensation for the complainant's inconvenience, mental agony, and financial loss.
The Commission directed the airlines and the travel service provider to refund the amount of Rs 1,47,800 spent on the purchase, along with a payment of Rs 50,000 as compensation for mental distress and Rs 5,000 towards the cost of proceedings.
Counsel for the Complainant: Adv. Umar Farook
Case Title: Cyril K James Vs. Malaysia Airlines and Ors.
Case Number: C.C. No.- 481/2021