Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Paras Ram vs Ministry Of Tourism & Civil Aviation on 8 May, 2007

  
 
 
 
 
 
 IN THE STATE COMMISSION  : DELHI





 

 



 IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI 

 

(Constituted under Section 9 clause
(b)of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ) 

  

 Date of Decision:
08-05-2007   

 

 Complaint Case
No. C-155/1998 

 

   

 

Shri Paras Ram,  Complainant 

 

S/o Shri Choit
Ram,  Through 

 

R/o BQ-141,
Shalimar Bagh,  Ms. Nutan Sinha, 

 

Delhi-110052.  Advocate. 

 

  

 

Versus 

 

  

 

1. Ministry of
Tourism & Civil Aviation Opposite
Party No.1 

 

Through its
Secretary, 
Through 

 

Rajiv Gandhi
Bhawan,  Ms.
Shivani Yadav, 

 

New
Delhi-110003. Advocate. 

 

  

 

2. Indian
Airlines, Opposite
Party No.2 

 

Through Its
Managing Director, 

 

Airlines House, 

 

New
Delhi-1100001. 

 

  

 

3. Air Line
Alliance Services Ltd. Opposite
Party No.3 

 

Through its
Managing Director, 

 

Alliance
Air-Air Link House, 

 

First Floor,
113, Gurudwara 

 

Rakab Ganj
Road, 

 

New
Delhi-110001. 

 

  

 

CORAM : 

  Justice
J.D. Kapoor - President

 

 Mr. Mahesh
Chandra - Member 
 

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers be allowed to see the judgment?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?

 

JUSTICE J.D. KAPOOR, PRESIDENT (ORAL)   On account of having jumped from the Aeroplane of the OP which was forced to go in for emergency landing, the complainant suffered fracture and remained admitted in various hospitals and underwent operations and suffered physically and mentally and has through this complaint claimed compensation of Rs. 10,10,000/- with interest.

2. However, OP-Airlines paid a Rs.

5,09,033/- to the complainant towards full and final settlement of his claim in the presence of his lawyer, out of which Rs. 2,06,780/- was directly disbursed to the hospital and Rs. 3, 02,245/-by way of medical expenses incurred by the complainant. But the complainant still claimed further compensation.

3. The main allegations of the complainant are that he had gone to Kashmir and for coming back from Sri Nagar, he hired the services of the OP No.2-Indian Airlines and for the same he purchased ticket for journey on 20-9-1996 and flew from Sri Nagar by Flight No. 428 for Delhi. On way back from Sri Nagar, the flight was forced to go in for emergency landing and false alarm was raised because of which passengers were asked to jump from the emergency door in order to save their lives. Because of the alleged imminent danger to lives of the passengers on Board and also on the request of the staff of the Plane to jump quickly from the Emergency Door in case passengers wanted to save their lives, the complainant was forced to jump along with his son Harish Kumar, who was also accompanying from the emergency door, because of which complainant sustained compound, communited fractures, dislocation of the left ankle because of which complainant had to remain hospitalised from 20-06-1996 to 09-07-1996 in Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, wherein during hospitalisation complainant had to go through two major operations on 21-06-1996 and 22-06-1996.

4. In our view the complainant has been adequately compensated. Even if we hold OP guilty for deficiency in service in landing the Aeroplane by way of emergency landing and asking the passengers to jump from the emergency door in order to save their life and had the complainant not jumped from the plane then his life itself would have been in danger, still complainant has been adequately compensated.

5. In such a situation the service provider like the Airlines are required to take care of each and every passenger and make arrangement for their safe landing may be through emergency door or through any other process. If the passengers are asked to jump from the emergency door they are bound to suffer fracture or injuries and such a lapse on the part of the Airlines render it liable to compensate the person as to the expenses incurred by him for the treatment and the mental agony suffered by him.

6. In the instant case the OP-Airlines had not only reimbursed the medical expenses incurred to the tune of Rs. 3,02,245/- to the complainant but also paid Rs. 2,06,780/- as compensation. We do not find any justification for further compensating the complainant.

7. In the result complaint is dismissed.

8. A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties free of charge And thereafter the file be consigned to Record Room.

9. Announced on the 8th May, 2007.

   

(Justice J.D. Kapoor) President     (Mahesh Chandra) Member jj