State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
M.Selvaraj, Area Marketing Manager, ... vs Lt. Col.Subir Dutta Roy, No.26, Farm ... on 25 April, 2011
BEFORE THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI BEFORE THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI (BENCH II) Present: Thiru.A.K.Annamalai, M.A., M.L., M.Phil., Presiding Member Judicial Tmt.Vasugi Ramanan, M.A., B.L., Member F.A.No.192/2009 [Against order in C.C.No.7/2008 on the file of the DCDRF, Udhagamandalam] MONDAY, THE 25th DAY OF APRIL 2011. M.Selvaraj, Area Marketing Manager, Indian Airlines Ltd., (Now known as National Aviation Company of India Limited), Coimbatore. ` .. Appellant/Opposite party Vs. Lt. Col.Subir Dutta Roy, No.26, FARM Quarters, Wellington Barracks, The Nilgiris. .. Respondent/Complainant The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, Udhagamandalam, alleging deficiency against the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.97,120/- as compensation, and to pay cost of the proceedings. The District Forum, allowed the complaint against the opposite party. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite party, praying to set aside the order of the District Forum, Udhagamandalam, dated 13.4.2009 in C.C.No.7/2008. This appeal coming before us for hearing finally on 01.04.2011, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel on both sides, and perused the documents, written submissions as well as the order of the District Forum, this Commission made the following order :- Counsel for the Appellant/opposite party : M/s.N.G.R.Prasad & K.Srinivasamurthy,Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant : Mr.R.Subramanian, Advocate. ORDER
A.K.ANNAMALAI, PRESIDING MEMBER JUDICIAL
1. The opposite party is the appellant.
2. The Respondent/complainant filed a complaint praying for the relief of directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.97,120/- as compensation, and to pay cost.
3. The details of the complaint in brief are as follows :- The complainant had purchased two tickets of Indian Airlines bearing Nos.2644236497 and 2644236498 fly from Gowhati to Kolkatta by I.C.230 on 14.6.07. The above flight was cancelled on the same day since the Indian Airlines Staff went on a strike. However the Indian Airlines staff at Gowhati Airport made an endorsement in the above referred tickets to Indigo Airlines to enable the complainant and his daughter to fly the same day to Kolkatta. But the endorsement of the Indian Airlines was not accepted by the Indigo Airlines. Being informed the same, Indian Airlines staff at Gowhati Airport cancelled the endorsement of the Indigo flight and made another endorsement on the tickets stating Fly IC 230 of 14th June 2007 cancelled full refund.
4. The complainant had spent Rs.6700/- to purchase new air tickets in flight No.S2-316 of Air Sahara Airlines at Gowhati Airport to reach Kolkatta the same day i.e on 14.6.07 to attend his urgent commitments. Later on the complainant approached the Indian Airlines through his letter No.31614/SDR dated 10.6.07 for refund of the amount spent by the complainant to ply in Sahara Airlines from Gowhati, to Calcutta on the same day. Unfortunately to the complainants surprise the Indian Airlines had paid only Rs.2580/- by cash through their letter No.CJB/16/MS/48 dated 19.6.07 which cannot be accepted by the complainant. The reply of the Indian Airlines to the complainants legal notice is unacceptable and at least they could have refunded Rs.6700/- which was actually spent by the complainant for the purchase air ticket from Air Sahara.
The attitude of the opposite party is not a good approach towards the consumer. The opposite party is bound to refund not only the amount of Rs.6700/- spent by the complainant but also to compensate all the financial loss on incidental expenditure, inconvenience and mental agony suffered by the complainant due to the negligence of the opposite parties service. The complainant and his daughter were compelled to purchase new air tickets to reach Kolkatta the same day to met the complainants personal commitments. Hence the complainant come forward with this complaint seeking the relief against the opposite parties as prayed for.
5. The opposite party filed its written version by denying the allegations of the complainant and except those specifically admitted. The opposite party is not aware of the reasons for his travel from Gowhati from Kolkatta along with his daughter. It is true that the complainant was a passenger who booked for the flight from Gowhati to Calcutta by Flight I.C.230 on 14.6.07 Air Corporations Employees Union representing a majority of his opposite party Airlines went on a flash strike on 13th and 14th June 2007 leading to cancellation of certain flights including that of the complainants flight. All efforts were made by the opposite party airlines to reduce the hardships of the traveling public as far as possible, alternative arrangements were made. In the case of the complainant that the affected passengers of the flight IC 230 of 14.6.07 were left in the lurch. The opposite party officials at Gowhati Airport had two choices were to deal with the situation viz, authorize full refund on the affected passengers tickets and/or endorse their tickets to other carrier (Airlines) which whom they had adhoc arrangements to accept the tickets on face value. The said officials at Gowhati Airport tried their level best to accommodate most of the passengers including the complainant by endorsing the tickets to other carrier M/s. Indigo along with two other carriers viz., King Fisher Airlines and Spice Jet had agreed to accept Indian Airlines flight coupon on face value during the period of industrial unrest. Since M/s.Indigo could not accept them due to operational reasons the next alternative available to this opposite party was only to refund the collected amount from the passengers regardless of the clause of travel. The said officials at Gowhati Airport had done only endorsing on the complainants tickets.
The full refund here donoted the fare charged on the tickets issued by the Indian Airlines and not other Airlines.
When this issue was brought to the notice of the opposite parties Area Marketing Manager he wrote to the complainants travel agent on 24.7.07 to effect full refund to him. Even though the special tickets were bought in Clause which is non refundable (For X-Class tickets cash refund was not given then only an equalent MCO is issued which has to be used for travel only therefore the opposite party had no understanding with the M/s.Sahara Airlines for acceptance of the tickets on face value during the strike period. The complainant had bought tickets from them of his own volition and traveled on that day paying full fare to them. While the opposite party have refunded entire money collected by them to the complainant he seeking to refund of the money he has paid to M/s.Sahara Airlines. There is no provision in the opposite party Airlines requires to refund money on tickets issued by other Airlines. The complainant has not made M/s.Indigo Airlines as a party to explain why they did not accept the endorsement given by the opposite party. Hence this complaint is barred for non jointer of necessary parties.
There is no deficiency on the part of the opposite party. No willful damage was caused with any malafide intention. The claim of the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
6. On the basis of materials placed before it the District Forum allowed the complaint after an enquiry by directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards damages for mental agony and sufferings and Rs.2,000/- being the costs.
7. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the opposite party has come forward with this appeal and in the grounds of appeal among other things, it is contended that the District Forum allowed the complaint erroneously without considering the material documents filed to prove the negligence on the part of the opposite party.
8. While considering both sides arguments, averments and contentions that it is not in dispute that the complainant have booked two tickets with the opposite party for their travel on 14.6.07 and subsequently on that day the flight was cancelled and made the complainant to spent Rs.6,700/- for the purchase of new air tickets in AIR Sahara Airlines at Gowhati Airport to reach Calcutta on the same day. But the opposite party refunded only Rs.2580/- which cannot be accepted by the complainant. It is contended by the opposite parties they have made all the efforts to accommodate the complainant through other airlines and in spite of best efforts the other Airlines have not accommodated them for want of seats and while considering the contention of the complainant even though they were made to travel by engaging taxi to reach the place in time and by purchasing fresh air tickets through Air Sahara at Gowhati by spending Rs.6700/-. The opposite party refunded only Rs.2,580/-. Though it is pointed out that the opposite parties cannot assigning any reason for cancellation of flight and it is also as per the contract of the Airlines company reserves the right without assigning any reason to cancel, advance reschedule over flight or delay the commencement or continuance of the flight and the company is not liable for damage occasioned by delay in the carriage by air passengers or package. In this case the question is relating to the refund of ticket amount and the complainant was forced to spend extra money in order to reached the designated place in time and in stead of refunding that amount spent for the purchase of tickets to the extent of Rs.6700/- in other airline the actual airline fare alone of Rs.2580/- was refunded and the District Forum considered the same and awarded Rs.25,000/- towards damages for mental agony and sufferings. While considering the facts and circumstances of the case even though as per the contract of the airlines opposite parties are no need to assign any reason for sudden cancellation of flight and thereby atleast the complainant could be compensated for the extra amount spent to avail the other air service and thereby we feel that the complainant is entitled for Rs.6700/- which he has spent by availing the service of Sahara Airlines and as far as compensation is concerned that the same to be deleted and accordingly we intend to allow the appeal to that extent alone.
7. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part by modifying the order of the District Forum as follows :-
(a) The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.6700/- the cost spent for the purchase of airlines ticket less Rs.2850/- if already paid.
(b) To pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and sufferings and to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- as costs and
(c) There will be no order as to cost in this appeal.
VASUGI RAMANAN A.K.ANNAMALAI, MEMBER PRESIDING MEMBER JUDICIAL INDEX : YES / NO sg/B-II/aka/Airlines