State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Jet Airway vs Radha Kinkari Kejriwal on 28 March, 2013
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission West Bengal BHABANI BHAVAN (GROUND FLOOR) 31, BELVEDERE ROAD, ALIPORE KOLKATA 700 027 SC.CASE NO. : FA/319/11 (Arisen out of Order Dated 23/05/2011 in Case No. 71/2010 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata-1) DATE OF FILING : 14.07.11 DATE OF FINAL ORDER: 28.03.13 APPELLANTS : 1. Jet Airway ( India) Limited, Queen Mansion, 18D, Park Street, Kolkata-700 016. 2. Narendra mansukhani, Queen Mansion, 18D, Park Street, Kolkata- 700 016. 3. Naresh Goyal, Chairman, Jet Airway (India) Limited, SMS Center, Andheri, Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400 059. RESPONDENT : Radha Kinkari Kejriwal, Daughter of Umang Kejriwal aged about 20 years, by faith Hindu, by occupation Student, residing at 13, Gurusaday Road, Kolkata- 700 019. BEFORE : MEMBER : MR. D.BHATTACHARYA MEMBER : MR. J.BAG FOR THE APPELLANTS: Mr. Ritobroto Banerjee., Ld. Advocate. FOR THE RESPONDENT : Mr. Avik Kr Das., Ld. Advocate. : O R D E R :
Mr. J.Bag, Ld. Member The present appeal is directed against the Order passed by the Ld. Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kolkata, Unit-1 allowing the complaint on contest with cost against O.Ps. with direction upon the OPs to refund the value / fare of Jet Airways ticket of the Complainant to the extent of Rs.62,0178/-(Sixty two thousand one hundred and seventy eight) only and also to pay the amount of Rs.83,292 /-(Eighty three thousand two hundred and ninety two) only being the cost of Air India ticket apart from compensation of Rs.8,00,000/-(Eight Lakh) only and litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-( Five thousand) only.
The Complaint case, in brief, was as follows:
The Complainant a girl student aged 20 years studying at Cardiff University, U.K. booked on or about 30, November 2009 a ticket (No. 5894711352869) for flight No. 9W-129 from London to Delhi on 09.12.2009 scheduled for departure at 20.50 hours .The Complainant was aware that the check-in time started 180 minutes before the departure of the concerned flight and would be closed 60 minutes before departure time for all classes. Admittedly, she reached the Jet Airways check-in counter at London, Heathrow Air-port 70 minutes prior to the scheduled departure of the flight No. 9W121. As she reported to the check- in counter, the staff present at the counter refused to issue boarding pass on the plea that the Complainant failed to report at least 90 minutes prior to the scheduled departure. As she was finally not issued any boarding pass for flight No. 9W-121 of Jet Airways inspite of all her request , she had to arrange an alternative air ticket of Air India flight for her return to India on 10.12.2009. The Complainants father wrote a letter on 10.12.09 to the Chairman, Jet Airways complaining that his daughter had to suffer serious harassment for the fault on the part of the Check-in staff as she was not allowed boarding pass for the flight No. 9W-121 though some other passengers who reported to the check-in counter after the Complainant were allowed .Thereafter, Advocates notices were issued to the O.Ps and having received no satisfactory reply from the O.Ps. a consumer complaint was lodged with the DCDRF, Kolkata Unit-I with prayer for directions upon O.Ps to refund the value/fare of the Jet Airways ticket amounting to Rs.62,178/-, Rs.83,292/- (Eighty three thousand two hundred ninety two ) only being the ticket fare of the Air India flight taken from London and Rs.10 lakh towards compensation for the harassment and mental agony and further Rs.10,000/- for cost.
The complaint was contested by the O.Ps who in their written objection filed that there was delay on the part of the Complainant in reporting to check-in counter. She reported 70 minutes prior to the departure time of the flight No. 9W121 which was 5 minutes after the closing of the check-in counter. Further, it was contended that the Complainants knowledge about closing of check-in counter was not correct in so far as it was well displayed on the website of Jet Airways that it was 70 minutes and not 60 minutes prior to the departure of all international flights that the check-in counter closes. She failed to present herself to the check-in counter on time and missed the flight for her own fault.
We have gone through the appeal together with the petition of complaint, Complainants ticket dated 19.12.2009 of Jet Airways, copy of the Air India Ticket dated 10.12.2009, letters/e-mails exchanged between the parties, including the print out from the web-site of Jet Airways showing that the ultimate check-in time in respect of international passengers is 75 minutes prior to the departure of International Flights from Heathrow , EU regulations and the impugned judgment. Ld. Advocates appearing for the Appellant and the Complainant / Respondent have been heard.
Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant submitted that the Respondent having reported to the check-in counter late for reasons beyond her control, (actual reason being stated that due to delay of one hour of the Coach from Cardiff to Heathrow) . The Complainant who reached one hour and ten minutes before the closing of the Jet Counter, could not be accommodated in the flight as the check-in counter was closed 5 minutes before her reporting. There was not the slightest hint indication in the website of the Jet Airways that she could be accommodated even if she reported for check-in 70 minutes prior to the departure of the flight. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the Appellant / O.P. and there was no discrimination against the Complainant as alleged. The passenger whom the Complainant noticed to have been issued boarding passes after her arrival at the check-in counter were already in check-in process and it was not a fact that they were given preference to the Complainant whatsoever. The impugned order was not valid and based on evidence, it was argued.
Ld. Advocate appearing for the Respondent argued that there was clear discrimination against the Complainant as she was not allowed to check-in while the others who came later were allowed. The Complainant had reported to the check-in counter much before the closing of the check-in and accordingly by refusal on the part of the counter staff to issue boarding pass, gross deficiency in-service was committed to the utter harassment and financial loss of the Complainant.
Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the Appellant/O.P and whether the Ld. Forum below rightly allowed the complaint are the points for consideration before us.
Admittedly, the Complainant /Respondent purchased a ticket for her air journey by flight No. 9W121 London-Delhi for 09.12.2009. The scheduled time of departure was 20.50 hours. The check-in time started 180 minutes before the departure of the flight. The Complainant knew / was aware that the check-in counter would close 60 minutes before departure of the flight she was booked for. She reached 70 minutes prior to the scheduled hours of departure of the flight. She was refused check-in and boarding pass was not issued to her on the alleged ground that she failed to report 90 minutes prior to the departure of the flight. She alleged that five other passengers who reported after her were allowed boarding passes for the flight in question by discrimination and she was compelled to avail alternative flight and there by suffered mental agony and financial losses because of deficiency in service on the part of the Appellant/O.P. O.P.-3 being the Chairman of Jet Airways, Head Office Mumbai was in a letter addressed by the Complainants father given the details of the distressing treatment meted out to his daughter and then followed correspondences in a chain between the parties which led to the filing of a consumer complaint before the Ld. Forum for adjudication.
Ld. Forum appears to have made an elaborate examination of all written submissions of both the Complainant, including the letter of complaint addressed to the Chairman Jet Airways by the Complainants father, Legal notices and replies / clarifications exchanged by the Complainant and the O.P.s over a period that spanned from 10.12.2009 to 14.01.2010. What is most important is that the Complainants failure to report to the check-in counter 75 minutes prior to the schedule departure of the flight has not been given that serious consideration as in respect of correspondences /queries /clarifications that followed subsequent to the fact of actual reporting of the Complainant to the check-in counter. From the point of view of deficiency in service, the only fact which was crucial is whether the Complainant was really aware about the ultimate hour of closing of check-in counter. No evidence in support of the Complainants knowledge about closing of check-in 60 minutes prior to the scheduled departure of the flight could be produced. It has been stated in the complaint that the Complainant was very much aware that check-in counter would be closed 60 minutes before departure time for all classes. What was the source of her knowledge has neither been explained nor proved with any evidence. It was essential and a must for the Complainant passenger herself to know for certain what the timings of starting and closing of check-in were for the flight she was going to avail of. There was no iota of relaxation in the rules of reporting as circulated in the website of the Jet Airways. It was very clear and prominent that check-in counters will be closed 75 minutes prior to the departure of the flight and even for the First Class / Premier Passengers and Jet Platinum and Gold members who avail of the tale-check-in facility bear the risk of being off loaded if they report 70 minutes prior to the standard time of departure.
Evidently lack of knowledge about exact check-in timings or, as admitted delay of one hour of the Coach from Cardiff to Hithro (Paragraph -2 of the letter written by the Complainants father on 10.12.2009) failed the Complainant /Respondent to report to the check-in-counter on time which was at the root of all subsequent complaint and correspondences . That fact alone has considerable force to subvert all allegations lodged by the Complainant which have hardly any force to disprove that the Complainant was right in holding that her knowledge about the closing hours of the check-in counter was correct Whether some other passengers were given undue advantage in preference to the Respondent /Complainants plea for similar undue advantage was a matter of strict proof which was not carried out.
In the said circumstances the appeal appears to have merit and the impugned order of the Ld. Forum below is not agreed with .
Hence, Ordered That the appeal be and the same is allowed on contest without however any cost . The impugned order is set aside.
MR. J.BAG MR. D.BHATTACHARYA MEMBER MEMBER