State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Japan Airlines International Co.Ltd. vs N.R.Ahuja & Ors. on 27 February, 2013
IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision : 27.02.2013 First Appeal No-407/10 (Arising out of the order dated 20.08.2009 passed by the District Forum, K.G.Marg, New Delhi Complaint Case no. CC-43/2006) IN THE MATTER OF:- JAPAN AIRLINES INTERNATIONAL CO.LTD. .Appellant CHANDRALOK BUILDING 31, JANPATH, NEW DELHI VERSUS 1. N.R.AHUJA & ORS. C-2/2262, VASANT KUNJ NEW DELHI-110070 ..Respondents 2. MRS. KARUNA AHUJA C-2/2262, VASANT KUNJ NEW DELHI-110070 3. V.K.TRAVELS & TOURS 4405 ANSARI ROAD DARYAGANJ NEW DELHI-110002 CORAM S.A.SIDDIQUI, MEMBER(JUDICIAL) S.C.JAIN, MEMBER 1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? S.C.JAIN,(ORAL) ORDER
(1). The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dt.20.08.2009 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum New Delhi, passed in complaint case no 43/06. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant/respondent no.1 along with his wife who is respondent no.2 approached OP no.2 complaint case i.e that is VK Travels and Tour to arrange air tickets for them for to and fro journey from Delhi to Sanfrancisco via Narita/Tokyo and back with a special request that only such Airlines be chosen in whose flights Vegetarian meals are also served. The OP no.2 arranged the required tickets in OP no.1/Appellant Airlines for the said journey of the complainant/respondent with his wife and confirmed that their request for Vegetarian meal during the whole journey had been got registered with OP no.1/appellant Airlines.
(2). As per the submission made by the complainants in their complaint, during the journey from Delhi to Sanfrancisco via Tokyo on 23.11.2004 and on return journey from Sanfrancisco to Tokyo on 21.01.2005 they were served Vegetarian meal. But during the journey from Narita/Tokyo to Delhi on 23.01.2005 the crew staff of the OPno.1/appellant Airlines do served the complainants with a packet/package each of Vegetarian food. The complainants had no occasion to suspect any wrong as they had on their previous journey were being served with Vegetarian food in similar looking packet/packages.
The complainants started eating the food served to them from those packages/packets which appeared to them to be Vegetarian food only. But, they immediately started to feel uneasy and vomiting type feeling and realized that the food served was not vegetarian as some fish had been served to them. The complainant immediately enquired from one of the air hostesses and she hesitatingly confirmed that the food was in fact Non-Vegetarian having fish in the content.
(3). The complainant became very restless and depressed due to this and could not eat anything thereafter for nearly 3 to 4 hours. As the journey was very long the complainant made a request to the airhostess to serve them some Vegetarian food as they were feeling very hungry, air hostess came after some time without any food packet and told them that no additional Vegetarian food packet is available as they receive the restricted supply as per the choices given to the Airlines. During the flight the complainants could not get anything for nine hours which was the approximate time taken by Airlines to reach Delhi inspite of the fact that even after making request to the crew staff to serve them something vegetarian, nothing was served to the complainants/respondents no.1 & 2.
(4). The complainant/respondent after reaching Delhi wrote a letter on 19.02.2005 to OP/appellant about their shocking experience during the aforsaid flight and again wrote a reminder letter on 06.06.2005 but the OP no.1/appellant did not pay any attention to the grievance of the complainant mentioned in his letters regarding serving of the Non-Vegetarian food in which fish was served to them and after eating the same they felt vomiting like tendency which made them tarumasied because being devout Hindu it is a sin to eat non-vegetarian food like fish, meat and chicken etc. Lately the OP no.1/appellant acknowledged the letters of the complainant vide their letter dt.06.7.2005 and only informing the complainant that they are looking into their complaint without mentioning anything about the cause of such a big lapse on their part.
(5). On not receiving any response to his complaint letter from OP no.1/Respondent the complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum, New Delhi who after hearing both the parties and taking into account the evidence filed by both the parties ordered the OP/appellant to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and harassment and has also ordered to pay Rs.10,000/- towards costs of litigation to the complainant.
(6).
That is what brings the appellant before this commission in appeal. Registered notice was served on the respondents who appeared and contested the appeal, respondents filed their reply to the appeal, arguments of both the parties heard.
(7). The main ground taken by the appellants in their appeal is that before the start of journey from Sanfrancisco to Delhi on 20.01.2005 they received a telephonic message from the daughter of the complainant to change the serving meal menu of Vegetarian meal to Hindu Meal (HNML) to her parents i.e the respondents and this request was received by their office on 20.01.2005 at 19:45 hours. The post investigates report printout computer record of the centralized Japan Airlines computer reservation system of bookings for the respondent no.1 and2 here in reads as follows.
Cancelled SSR SSR VGML XBO2 JL001Y/21 JAN 01AHUJA/NARENDRAM CANCELLED SSR SSR VGML XB02 JL471Y23JAN 01AHUJA/NARENDRAM Added SSR SSR HNMVJL FS02 JL001121JAN 01AHUJA/NARENDRAM Added SSR SSR HNML JLFS02 JL047123JAN 01AHUJA 23JAN/NARENDRAM SUICLAX 20JAN 1945DAUGHTER The appellant accordingly submitted that the respondents menu of meals was changed from Vegetarian to Hindu meal in their record and accordingly respondent was served Hindu meal on the return journey from Tokyo to Delhi on 23.01.2005, and it is also well known fact that most Hindus are not Vegetarian and as per the international practice HNML meal is not a vegetarian meal and normally egg, chicken, fish are the main dish along with side dishes of salad of fresh vegetables, yogurt, Vegetarian curry and rice. The appellant further submitted that it is also a complete false hood on the part of respondent no.1 and 2 that they had nothing to eat during the entire flight, since as a matter of rule some Vegetarian items like cheese, fresh fruits, biscuits, bread etc. are always available during the flight.
(8). The other ground taken by the appellant is that the complainants made no complaint to the cabin crews during the flight or to the staff of the appellant at the Delhi Airport on landing, and no service irregularity message (sim) was filed by the chief of cabin crew at the destination of the flight and moreover meal served on board are a special free supplementary and complementary facilities and not paid for by the complainant/respondents and accordingly the complainant/respondent is also not covered under the definition of complainant under the Consumer Protection Act.
(9). The first ground of the appellants that the District Forum has failed to appreciate that the daughter of the complainants/appellants had made the request for change of food menu from Vegetarian to Hindu meal does not hold any ground because on the written complaint of the respondents/complainant dt.19.02.2005 and reminder dt.06.06.2005 to the appellants that they had served non-Vegetarian food, the appellants failed to reply their letters even up to 06.07.2005 and in their letter dt.06.07.2005 which was replied after about five months appellants did not mentioned the fact that the non-Vegetarian Hindu food was served to the respondents on the request of their daughter, but the Airlines simply acknowledged the letter of respondents.
On going through the post investigate report printout computer record of the centralized Japan Airlines it is also observed that if at all the version of Airlines is taken to be true than on both occasion that is on 21.01.2005 and 23.01.2005 the respondent should have been served Hindu Non-Vegetarian food but inspite of their record the respondents were served Vegetarian meal during their journey from Sanfrancisco to Tokyo on 21.01.2005 but were served Non-Vegetarian food on 23.01.2005 during journey from Tokyo to New Delhi, which version had been stated by the complainants/respondents on an affidavit. The above facts contradicts their (airlines) own statements and it is not how the change of meal was entered into airlines system and if it would have been done than why the airlines not mentioned this fact in reply to respondents/complainant letters and this stand was only taken by the airlines only in reply to complainants/respondents case which creates suspicion on the part of airlines.
(10). The appellant had also failed to show any proof that the meal was changed at the instructions of the sister of the complainant/respondent, Airlines failed to provide any specific telephone number from which they received the telephone call to change the menu, in the absence of which the version of the Airlines cannot be relied upon, where as the respondent on an affidavit had stated that no such instructions were given by their daughter to the Airlines to change the menu from vegetarian to Hindu meal, and if at all it is taken to be true that the daughter of the complainant ever gave any instruction, then how the Airlines served vegetarian food to the respondent during their back journey from Sanfrancisco to Tokyo on 21.01.2005 and served HNML non-vegetarian food during journey from Tokyo to New Delhi. This commission is of the view that the District Forum below has rightly held the Airlines deficient in providing services to the respondents. The agony of a person who does not eat Non-Vegetarian food and mistakenly due to negligence of someone eats the Non-Vegetarian food can only be judged by putting oneself into their position and this agony can never be compensated with the amount of money.
(11). The respondent as soon as started eating the food observed something wrong in the food and they started feeling uneasy and vomiting like feeling, respondents immediately called the Airhostess who had served the food packet and she confirmed that they (respondent) had been served the Non-Vegetarian food. It is wrong to say on the part of the Airlines that cabin crews were not informed of the mistake and no service irregularity message was filed. This was the duty of the cabin crews to mention all the happenings in report which they failed to do just to avoid their liability. This clearly shows negligence and deficiency of service on the part of Airlines. Airlines served Non-Vegetarian food to devout Hindus, as a result of which they had to go to Tirupati Balaji Mandir for shudhikaran on which sufficient amount was spend by them.
(12). Honble National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission in the case M/S Indian Airlines Vs S.N.Sinha decided on 09.11.1990 had clearly stated that in flights, supply of food to the passengers while on board the aircraft is part of service-and defect in food supplied is to be regarded as deficiency in the same and Airlines would be responsible for the same. This is also the general practice of the Airlines that they add the amount of meal in the tickets amount, accordingly the Airlines i.e appellant cannot take the plea that the meal served on board are special free supplementary and complementary facilities and free of charge and does not make the passengers Consumers as per Consumer Protection Act 1986.
Accordingly this commission finds nothing wrong in the judgment of the District Forum and upheld the same and the appeal is dismissed being without merit. No order as to cost.
Copy of the order be made available to the parties free of cost as per law and case file be consigned to record room.
FDR if any be returned to the appellants as per rules.
S.A.SIDDIQUI Member(Judicial) S.C.JAIN Member FATIMA