NEW DELHI: A district consumer commission in Himachal Pradesh has ordered Paytm to refund a cancelled flight ticket amount to a customer, along with compensation and legal costs. The commission said Paytm failed to make sure the refund actually reached him, even though the airline had already sent the money to Paytm.The Bilaspur District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on July 18 held Paytm liable for deficiency in service and dismissed the complaint against the airline.How did the flight ticket refund dispute begin?According to the court order, the complainant had booked return flight tickets between Chandigarh and Srinagar through Paytm, for a trip with a friend. The returning flight was scheduled for April 7, 2020. But because of the nationwide covid-19 lockdown, the flight got cancelled. The complainant alleged that he emailed both the airline and the booking platform several times asking for his money back, but never got the refund. So he approached the consumer commission, saying this amounted to poor service.The airline told the commission that it had brought in a scheme called “protect your PNR,” which let passengers use their fare amount to book a new flight later instead of asking for a refund. It said that once this scheme’s validity period ended, it processed the refund and sent Rs 6,437 to Paytm, the travel agent through which the ticket had been booked.However, Paytm claimed that it had tried twice to send the refund to the complainant through refund links, but he did not claim the money in time and the links expired — so it argued that the fault was on the complainants part.Why did the commission hold Paytm liable?The bench comprising President Purender Vaidya and members Manchali and Jagdish Thakur held that once Go Airlines had refunded the money to Paytm, it was now Paytm’s job to make sure the amount actually reached the customer. It pointed out that Paytm’s own records showed it had received the refund from the airline, and did not accept Paytm’s argument that the customer was to blame just because the refund links had expired.“The only plea of the opposite party No.2 is that refund link was shared with the complainant, but complainant did not take steps for the refund and shared link expired… But, the self-serving affidavit of opposite party No.2 is not sufficient to prove this plea,” the bench noted.The commission also said Paytm could easily have asked the customer for his bank account details and sent the money directly. It noted that even after the complaint was filed, Paytm chose to fight the case in court instead of simply refunding the amount.On Paytm’s claim that a technical glitch stopped the refund from going through, the commission said this did not let the company off the hook — it was still Paytm’s responsibility to make sure the customer got his money.“It was the duty of the opposite party No.2 to see how refund process was to be completed and how this amount was to be repaid or refunded to the complainant. But, the opposite party No.2 failed to discharge the said duty, which amounts to deficiency in service,” the commission observed.The commission also found that the customer was made to go through an unnecessary court case only because Paytm failed to complete the refund, even though the airline had already sent the money to Paytm in the first place.“Since complainant was unnecessarily harassed by the opposite party No.2 and he was forced to file the present complaint, therefore, the opposite party No.2 is further directed to pay compensation of Rs 10,000 and litigation cost to the tune of Rs 5,000 to complainant,” the commission concluded.As a result, the commission ordered Paytm to pay Rs 6,437 to the customer, with 6 per cent yearly interest from the date the complaint was filed until the amount is paid. It also directed Paytm to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation and Rs 5,000 towards legal costs, taking the total to Rs 21,437, plus interest. The complaint against Go Airlines was dismissed, since the commission found the airline had already done its part by transferring the refund to Paytm.
