National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Air India vs Dr. Kishore And Ors. on 26 May, 2003
Equivalent citations: III(2003)CPJ40(NC)
ORDER
D.P. Wadhwa, J. (President)
1. Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has passed severe stricture against Air India, the national air carrier. When we examine the facts of the case, we would not differ with what the State Commission has said. It is such type of conduct which is subject matter of this petition that reflects the inefficiency and un-friendly attitude of the staff of Air India towards its customers which brings the national airlines into dispute.
2. It is the Air India who is the petitioner before us. It was opposite party No. 1 before the District Forum on a complaint filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 being husband and wife, who wanted to go to San Francisco (U.S.A.). They are residents of Nagpur. They purchased the Air Tickets for the travel by Air India from Delhi to San Francisco from respondent No. 4 - M/s. Trade Wings Limited who was opposite party No. 2 before the District Forum and is the authorised agent of Air India.
3. Complainants were to take the flight from Delhi. They reached Delhi on 10.6.1999 at 10.30 p.m. The flight was to depart from Delhi International Airport at 1.30 a.m. on 11.6.1999. Complainants reported at the counter of Air India and they were directed to go to counter of Asiana Airlines. Complainants reported there. Necessary formalities were completed, like security check and screening of baggage. Their baggage was put on carrier belt and tags attached. When the complainants were given boarding passes they found that these were only upto Seoul. They were told that their tickets were confirmed only upto Seoul and onward journey from Seoul to San Francisco were not confirmed. They were further told that they were entitled to travel upto Seoul only on the boarding passes issued to them and for their second leg of journey they will have to get new boarding passes at Seoul. They were also told that since their tickets were not confirmed from Seoul to San Francisco they had to go at their own risk. So, naturally the complainants were shocked. They were having confirmed tickets right upto San Francisco which was issued by Air India. They went to the counter of Air India but staff there was unhelpful and they were again directed to the counter of Asiana Airlines. In short, complainants were tossed from the counter of Air India to that of Asiana Airlines. Complainants could not board the flight which left as per its schedule. Their request to the Air India for accommodation fell on deaf ears. Staff of Air India was unhelpful and that odd hours the complainants had no alternative but to go to Delhi Railway Station to spend the night by hiring a taxi. Next day, complainants again contacted Air India and they were accommodated in another flight taking off at 11.30 p.m. on 12.6.1999 reaching San Francisco on 13.6.1999.
4. For back journey from San Francisco to Delhi, complainants were again having confirmed tickets issued by Air India. Due to their past experience, they made inquiry for the flight schedule to leave on 27.8.1999 but again they were told that the reservation was confirmed from San Francisco to Seoul only and not that from Seoul to Delhi. These were confirmed. Again, the same story of unhelpful attitude of the Airlines' staff. Result was complainants purchased afresh tickets from Singapore Airlines from San Francisco to Mumbai paying Rs. 62,031/- for the new tickets. They could get the flight only on 7.9.2002 and had to spend extra 9 days at San Francisco. For these extra stay at San Francisco they had to incur expenses.
5. Complaining deficiency in service complaint was filed in the District Forum claiming Rs. 62,031/- as fare for the purchase of air tickets, Rs. 78,300/- for cost of extra stay in U.S.A. and compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs.
6. Defence of Air India was that it was merely an agent of Asiana Airlines and that airlines should also have been made a party as it was Asiana Airlines which was principal carrier. Air India also admitted that the complainants were having confirmed tickets but there was some fault in the computer system of Asiana Airlines. Air India denied that the behaviour of staff was unhelpful or rude.
7. After considering the whole aspect of the matter, District Forum directed Air India to pay Rs. 62,031/- with interest @ 12% from the date of purchase of tickets by the complainants. It further directed Air India to pay Rs. 50,000/-as compensation. A direction was also issued to Air India to take all necessary steps as far as booking of the flight is concerned and provide all help, assistance, accommodation to the genuine ticket holders.
8. Aggrieved from this order of the District Forum Air India filed an appeal before the State Commission. State Commission expressed unhappiness at the conduct of the Air India and the misery and sufferings that the complainants had to undergo.
9. Now, still feeling aggrieved, Air India has come before us. When we look at chains of events, we hardly find any ground to interfere. Rather we feel Air India has been left off cheaply. If Air India has code arrangement with any International Airlines and Air India issues confirmed tickets, it is its responsibility to provide necessary assistance and help to the passengers.