Forced to hire car driver to reach Chandigarh as bus fails to arrive, lawyer wins Rs 12,500

The aggregator cannot escape its responsibility by relying on unverified claims of a “no-show” provided by the transport operator, the order held.

“The failure of the bus operator to operate the bus from the scheduled place, coupled with the failure of the travel booking portal to verify the breach and process a refund of the fare (Rs 771), amounts to a clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act,” the commission said on September 1.

The ruling pointed out that on account of such lapse, the complainant was compelled to arrange urgent personal transportation to discharge his legal professional duties in Chandigarh, subjecting him to unexpected financial outlay, mental agony, and physical inconvenience.

Booked bus fails to arrive

The complainant, a practising lawyer in Gurdaspur, said he booked a bus ticket through a travel booking portal on February 17, 2025, for travelling from Gurdaspur to Chandigarh on February 20 at 5.40 am. He paid Rs 771 for the ticket and was allotted seat no. 4.

The bus was to be operated by a private bus operator company, while the booking included travel insurance. The complainant reached Gurdaspur bus stand at 5.20 am, but the bus did not arrive. On contacting the operator, he was allegedly told that the bus had developed a fault and that he should board it from Mukerian at 7.40 am.

He then cancelled the ticket and travelled to Chandigarh in his own car after spending Rs 2,500 on hiring a driver and around Rs 5,000 on fuel, toll and other expenses. He also claimed that despite cancelling the bus ticket, the fare was not refunded.

He then moved the consumer commission, alleging deficiency in service and seeking a refund and compensation.

Ticket non-refundable: Travel portal

The travel booking portal denied liability, maintaining that it was only an online intermediary and that the bus operator was responsible for the cancellation and operation of the service.

It also claimed that the complainant was a “no-show” and that the ticket was non-refundable. The insurance company, meanwhile, argued that its insurance policy did not cover losses arising from bus cancellation or alternative travel expenses.

Portal shares liability: Order

The commission relied on the complainant’s unrebutted testimony and noted that the bus operator failed to produce GPS logs, trip charts or conductor registers to show that the bus had reached Gurdaspur at the scheduled time.

“Unrebutted testimony of the complainant establishes that opposite party No.2 defaulted in providing the scheduled service. And thereafter arbitrarily instructing a passenger to travel nearly 35–40 km to Mukerian at 7.40 am to board a bus booked from Gurdaspur constitutes gross deficiency in service,” it held.

The commission found that the recorded conversation between the complainant and the bus operator contradicted the travel booking portal’s claim that the passenger had failed to reach the boarding point. The conversation showed that the operator had admitted non-availability of transport from Gurdaspur and directed the complainant to board from Mukerian.

Referring to the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, the commission said, “Online travel portals share joint liability with the principal service provider for service failures, sudden disruptions, and non-refund of money, as the consumer transacts directly with the platform.”

Takeaway

The ruling underscored that online travel portals cannot automatically avoid consumer liability by calling themselves intermediaries. Where a confirmed booking fails, portals may share responsibility with service providers for service failures, disruptions, and non-refund of money.

Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Punjab: 1800-425-1082) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.

Don’t miss out on these stories:

Woman, baby kept waiting 10 hours on plane, airline ordered to pay Rs 1.5 lakh

Bought 4 kg onions but ‘scale showed just 3.5 kg’, Punjab man wins Rs 20,000 payout

LIC rejects death claim citing ‘non-disclosure’ of hole in heart, man’s father wins Rs 5 lakh