Air India

P.Bhaskara Narayana
S/o.Late Sathyanarayana Rao,
R/o. “Anand A”,
S-1, Nemali Meadows,
12-2-715/D, Padmanabha Nagar,
Hyderabad – 500028.

……Complainant

And
1. The Airport Manager, Air India, Saifabad,
Hyderabad – 500004.

2. The Managing Director,
Air India Limited,
Mumbai – 400021. ….. Opposite Party


O R D E R


1. This is a Complaint filed by the Complainant under section 12 of C.P. Act, 1986, to pay him back the actual expenditure incurred by him while purchasing new pair of cloths, basic necessities etc., amounting to 411 US $ and for payment of the compensation of 1000 US $ for the mental agony, the total claim being Rs.62,000/-.




2. The case of the complainant as set out in the complaint in brief is that he had been to USA to attend to an important business meeting by travelling in the flight of the opposite parties from Hyderabad to New York on 23-02-2007. He had paid the cost of the ticket. He had checked his entire luggage including the basic essentials such as paste inner garments, slippers etc., in two baggages. The identification tags were also given to the baggages.



3. While so, the complainant landed at the JFK Air Port, New York at about 5-00 p.m. on 23-02-2007 but his baggage was found missing. Immediately, he lodged a complaint at opposite party’s office in JFK Air Port. The staff of opposite parties could not trace the baggage and were not even answering him. He suffered hardship as he continued to wear the same clothes for 2 days. Even his business documents were also kept in the baggage.

The opposite parties did not provide him the necessary services. They refused to compensate him on the ground that he was not a business class passenger. The fact that he was a frequent flyer and a member of the flying returns programme No.F017181 did not have any effect on them. When it comes to loss of luggage there cannot be any discrimination between one class of passenger and the other.



4. It is further pleaded that he had travelled to Philadelphia on the 23rd night by purchasing additional pair of clothes and essentials. Even on 24th & 25th also he tried to contact the opposite parties at JFK Air port but they could not even care to lift the phone. Thus, they caused mental agony and great inconvenience. On the 25th he once again returned back to JFK Air port for the follow up action. However, at last, the opposite parties traced his baggage and handed over the same at 8-00 p.m. on 25-02-2007 after a lapse of more than 48 hours.




5. It is further pleaded that owing to the missing of his luggage, he could not stick on to his original schedule of the destination. He spent the night on 25-02-2007 at Hotel Hilton Wood Bridge, New Jersey incurring the expenditure of about 200 US $. He also spent 50 US $ towards the shared taxi services to travel from Philadelphia to New York. He had spent 161 US $ through credit card for purchasing new set of clothes so as to attended to his business meetings.




6. Inspite of several letters, phone calls and legal notice, the opposite parties, who were negligent and deficient in their services, failed to respond. Hence the complaint.



7. The opposite parties filed a common counter denying various allegations made in the complaint. However, they admitted the travel of the complainant from Hyderabad to New York and checking in of two baggages. They also admitted that the complainant, on arrival at JFK Air port, did not receive his 2 baggages, for which, he made a complaint.



8. The opposite parties raised a plea that this forum has no jurisdiction as the cause of action did not arise at Hyderabad but at JFK Air port in USA.




9. It is further pleaded that their staff carried out the tracer to locate the missing baggage and ultimately on 24-02-2007 they traced the baggage and reported the matter to the complainant, who ultimately received the same on 25-02-2007. It is further pleaded that due to certain errors, the baggage gets misplaced sometimes. It is admitted that the baggage could be located within 48 hours and pleaded that there was no deficiency in service on their part.



10. It is further pleaded that whenever the baggage is missed, there has been a provision in the Airline Industry to pay interim relief of 75 US $ per a passenger for purchase of immediate needy items. Accordingly the complainant was entitled for 75 US $ but the same could not be paid as the PIR File name was not given correctly. It is further pleaded that the complainant was supposed to declare the valuables and business documents etc., while checking in but he did not do so.



11. Finally, the opposite parties conceded to make payment of 75 US $ equivalent to Rs.2,979/- at the rate of Rs.39.72 per dollar as the interim relief. It is further pleaded that the complainant is not entitled for the compensation etc.,



12. The complainant filed a reply affidavit stating that the cause of action arose at Hyderabad where the baggage was checked in. It is denied that the opposite parties forwarded the baggages on 24-04-2007 itself. It is further pleaded that the agents of opposite parties informed him that he was not entitled for any interim relief on the ground that did not travel in the business class.


There is his name on the baggage tags. His name was also fed through the computer system operated by the opposite parties. It is further denied that the opposite parties ever offered interim relief or the baggage on 24th. If, the baggage was sent to the complainant, he would not have gone to the Air port all the way.




13. To substantiate his case, the complainant has chosen to file his evidence affidavit and relied on Exs.A1 to A14. On the other hand the opposite parties have not filed any evidence affidavit or relied on any documentary evidence. It is represented to treat the counter as their evidence affidavit. Both sides filed separate memos to treat their pleadings and evidence as their written arguments. However, both sides advanced oral arguments.




14. The points that arise for consideration are:-



1. Whether this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to try the case?



2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? and if, so, whether the complainant is entitled for the amount claimed in the complaint?



3. To what relief?



15. Point No.1:- Section-11 of the C.P. Act deals with the jurisdiction aspect. The complaint can be filed where any one of the opposite parties resides and also where the cause of action wholly or in part arises. In the instant case opposite party No.1 is at Hyderabad. Further, the baggage was checked in at Hyderabad Airport and as such it can be said that the cause of action arose for the complainant at Hyderabad. So, this Forum has territorial Jurisdiction to try this case. As a matter of fact the opposite parties did not agitate this point during the arguments.


This point is answered against the opposite parties.



16. Point No.2:- There are several facts which have been admitted by the opposite parties, namely, the performance of the Journey by the complainant from Hyderabad to New York (JFK Airport) on 23-02-2007 in their flight, check in of two baggages, the missing of the same and the complaint given by the complainant to the officers of opposite parties at JFK Airport. According to the complainant, he stayed in Hilton Wood Bridge Hotel at New Jersey by spending about 200 US $. In proof of the same, he filed Ex.A9, the copy of the bill issued by Hilton Wood Bridge Hotel at New Jersey. This shows that the complainant took a room at 9-17 p.m of 25-02-2007 and vacated it on the next day. The rent and the taxes paid by him is 184.86 US $.

There is no reason to disbelieve the genuineness of this bill. According to the complainant he purchased a pair of clothes by spending about 161 $. He produced Ex.A10 bill issued by the concerned shop. This document also discloses that on 25-05-2007 he spent 161.50 US $ on his clothing. According to the complainant he has also purchased small items like tooth brush, paste etc., but he has not produced any bills for the same. Thus, it is quite evident that the complainant was made to spend about 346.36 US $. So, even if it is taken that he is spent some amount for purchasing the small items like tooth brush, paste, slippers etc., it would come to about 350 US $ in total.




17. The opposite parties, while admitting the missing of the baggage, stated that there is a provision in the Air line industry to pay interim relief of 75 US $ for purchasing immediate needy items. However, in this case they have not paid any interim relief. Further, admittedly, the arrival of the complainant at JFK Airport was in the evening and as such he has rightly taken a Hotel to stay to night by spending the amount noted in Ex.A9. The opposite parties are bound to reimburse the amount spent under Exs.A9 and A10 which comes to about 350 US $. The opposite parties in their counter noted the exchange value of dollar at rupees 39.72, which comes to about Rs.14,000/-.




18. The complainant claimed 1,000 US $ towards compensation for mental agony etc., The admitted facts disclose that lot of inconvenience was caused to the complainant as he could not receive the baggage that was checked in. According to the complainant he couldnot receive the baggage till 25-02-2007, where as, the opposite parties stated that they could trace the baggage on 24-02-2007. Any way the fact remines that the complainant could not get back his baggage for more than a day or two. Naturally, a person going on business trip would have carried the business documents and other material records with him.


It is also an admitted fact that the complainant had also booked a return ticket for 3rd March, 2007. Ex.A7 discloses that the complainant was working as the Director & Chief Financial Officer of NATCO Pharma Ltd., There is no material for the opposite parties to deny that the complainant was not business trip. It cannot be a pleasure trip that too to USA by spending such huge amount. So, naturally the complainant must have felt total inconvenience for want of his documents and other material, carried for his business trip. So, naturally, he should be adequately compensated for the error committed by the opposite parties in missing and not handing over the baggage to him immediately after his arrival at JFK Airport, New York. The ends of justice would be met if, we award the compensation of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen thousand only) for the mental agony and inconvenience undergone by him.




19. According to the complainant he also spent 50 US $ for the shared taxi to travel from New York to Philadelphia and back. Of course, Ex.A7 also recites the same, but we are not inclined to grant this amount as he would have to travel to Philadelphia even if, he had baggage with him for his business purposes. The complainant is not entitled for compensation under any other head except those that have been awarded above. Thus he is entitled for total amount of Rs.29,000/-.



20. In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties are directed to pay a sum of Rs.29,000/-(Rupees Twenty Nine thousand only) towards the claim besides Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two thousand only) towards costs of this litigation.
For compliance, 30 days time is granted.

Comments

  • adv.singhadv.singh Senior Member
    edited February 2010
    consumer case(CC) No. CC/06/159

    Sri Mahendra Kr. Sarda
    ...........Appellant(s)

    Vs.

    The Manager, AIR INDIA
    ...........Respondent(s)


    BEFORE:


    Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


    OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


    OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


    OppositeParty/Respondent(s):

    ORDER

    In the Court of the

    Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

    8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.



    CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 159 / 2006



    1) Sri Mahendra Kr. Sarda,

    6B, Middleton Street, Kolkata-700071.
    Complainant



    ---Verses---

    1) The Manager, AIR INDIA,

    J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata-700071.
    Opposite Party



    Present : Sri S. K. Majumdar, President.

    Sri T.K. Bhattachatya, Member.



    Order No. 2 2 Dated 1 6 / 12 / 2 0 0 9 .



    Complainant Mahendra Kr. Sarda by filing a petition of complaint on 22.6.06 u/s 12 of the C.P. Act has prayed for issuing direction upon the o.p. viz. Manager, Air India for payment of Rs.1,51,627/- towards the treatment expenses in respect of Late Sarla Devi Sarda and compensation of Rs.2 lakhs and other reliefs as the forum may deem fit and proper.

    Fact of the case in short is that Sarla Devi Sarda, the mother of the complainant aged about 75 years, a wheel chair bound passenger was coming from London to Dumdum Airport by Air India flight no.150 accompanied by her grand son and nephew on 5.11.05. Before the journey from London Sandip Sarda, the grand son of Sarla Devi (now dead) requested the Air India authorities to allot a seat with sufficient leg space and close to the toilet for her old age and limited mobility capacity and Air India authorities assured full cooperation.

    But unfortunately it was found that instead of providing a seat with sufficient leg space and close to the toilet she was allotted a middle side seat with very minimum leg space extremely inconvenient for her movement and they also did not render any cooperation to that old infirm lady and accordingly, for want of space her legs seized due to meager blood supply to legs and she felt critically ill inside the aircraft.

    On arrival to Dumdum Airport it took couple of hours to get her down from the aircrafts and she was taken and admitted to Health Care and Research Centre Nursing Home by an ambulance and she was medically treated there for her cardio vascular accident which she suffered during her flight from London and even in spite of medical treatment she expired on 21.11.05 at the said nursing home due to the negligence of the Air India and so there is deficiency in service on the part of the o.p. and as such, complainant has filed this case with the aforesaid prayer.

    O.p. has contested this case by filing a w/v on 19.3.07 contending interalia that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the o.p., that the petition of complaint is thoroughly misconceived, speculative and harassive and it is liable to be dismissed.

    Their specific case is that for the interest of the flight and passengers safety, the emergency exist row seats are not allotted to infirm and wheelchair passengers. As Sarla Devi was extremely fat lady one aisle seat viz no.19G was allotted to her, but for a lack of movement she got fixed to the seat and could not get free from the seat on her row. After reaching the flight at Kolkata she was off loaded with the help of others by the sincere effort. She was admitted to the nursing home, but she died after 16 days from the date of journey.

    There is provision to provide additional seat by paying additional charges to the bulky passengers, but complainant or the escorts of Sarla Devi did not make any such request to the Air India authorities. When the doctor after the investigation came to the opinion that she died out of cerebro vascular stroke during transit from London to Kolkata then in that event it can be very reasonable to presume that she was not physically fit when she boarded journey at London for Kolkata. So, the doctor’s certificate does not show that there was any deficiency of service on the part of the o.p. and accordingly, they are not guilty of deficiency of service and as such, the case should be dismissed.



    Decision with reasons :

    Accordingly to the complainant Sarla Devi was a passenger of Air India flight from London to Dumdum Airport bearing PNR no.24D9G/IP on 5.11.09 and she felt ill inside the aircraft and with the help of ambulance she was boarded down with much pain and strain and she was taken to Health Care Research Centre Nursing Home and after 16 days from the date of journey she died there by cerebro vascular stroke. It is the specific allegation of the complainant that they requested the Air India authorities before flight to provide her with a seat having sufficient leg space and close to the toilet because of her limited mobility capacity, but even in spite of such request and assurance from airport they provided a seat in the middle side with minimum leg space which caused extreme inconvenience to her and for such non cooperation by Air India flight her legs were seized, she felt critically ill and ultimately she died out of cerebro vascular stoke for the extreme negligence on the part of the Air India authorities.

    On the other hand, it is the specific case of the Air India authorities that there is no deficiency of service on their part because at the time of boarding into the aircraft at London she was ill and medical certificate does not support the cause of death for in sufficient leg space and her medical condition was suppressed and does not at all true that the cause of death due to cerebro vascular stroke in transit from London to Kolkata. And as she was extremely a fat woman escorts could request for additional seat which could be provided to her by the Air India authorities. But instead of doing so, she booked only one seat and she died a natural death not due to the negligence on the part of the Air India authorities.

    We have perused the annexures viz. air ticket of Sarla Devi Sarda now dead. Admittedly she was an old woman of 75 years and was an extremely fat woman suffering from obesity. It is the allegation of the complainant that at the time of boarding from London she was normal and as she was an extremely fat woman the aircraft authority did not provide her double seat. It appears from annex-G that when she landed at Dumdum Airport from London her condition was very much critical and on examination and clinical investigation it was found that she was attacked with cerebro vascular stroke. It is the allegation of the complainant that she developed cerebro vascular stoke during the transit from London to Kolkata and she was accordingly, admitted to ICCU of nursing home in Kolkata. We have also perused the prescription annex-H and the death report showing that she died on 21.11.05 at Health Care and Research centre. Complainant with respect to the cause of death of Sarla Devi as available from the doctor’s report has drawn out attention to a decision reported in II (2008) CPJ 136 (NC).

    In view of this position and particularly assigning reasons and counter reasons by both the parties involving the question of deficiency of service of the airport authority. Let us now consider some important points.

    As we have mentioned earlier that she was an old lady of 75 suffering from obesity, common prudence demands that her previous medical report, case history, clinical test reports are required that the cause of her death there cerebro vascular stroke accelerated and accentuated during the transit from London to Kolkata and that too was due the deficiency of service of Air India authority. The complainant has not filed any such medical papers previous to her death when she was in Kolkata.

    In order to measure the intensity and gravity of her illness the case history of the patient namely here Sarla Devi is of high important which the complainant ought to have filed, but they did not file the same. This being the position, it is not out of context here to mention that an adverse presumption u/s 114 (g) of the Indian Evidence Act can be drawn against the complainant. Further in order to ascertain and establish the allegation the complainant ought to have filed the medical papers particularly the certificate of doctor of London about he fitness of Sarla Devi that at the relevant time her health condition was permissive to take such a long journey by air from London to Kolkata. We failed to understand and also failed to decipher any meaning that from the doctor’s certificate it indicates that her condition was improving but what was improving is not mentioned in the certificate.

    Further we do not find any scrap of paper that before boarding at London her escort or she herself gave any declaration at the check in point that she was ill. Admittedly, she was suffering from obesity and a seat provided to a normal person is sufficient for her. It was not unknown to the complainant and accordingly was it not his responsibility to book an additional seat for Sarla Devi for her proper accommodation.

    The doctor who issued certificate is simply an MBBS doctor. He is not a cardiologist and so his opinion not being a cardiologist that Sarla Devi died out of cerebro vascular stroke due to stoppage of blood circulation of legs is to be taken with a grain of salt. It can be said with a reasonable certainty if there was thrombosis of her legs due to insufficient leg space as alleged, in that event her lungs must have been affected which could be evident from the P.M. report, but her P.M. report has not been submitted by the complainant. Further before boarding in the aircraft neither the complainant nor her escort gave any declaration regarding her cardiological problem or any kind of illness. She dies after 16 days from the date of boarding to the date of death at the nursing home. This long gap of time between transit in aircraft and death at the nursing home simply highlights to the fact which the common prudence shows that there was no casual connection between her death and deficiency of service of the o.p.

    It is very unfortunate that an old woman died at the nursing home after 16 days of the flight from London to Kolkata and we have every sympathy for that. But in absence of any cancel far to speak of direct connection of her death involving any deficiency of service of the o.p. It is also equally unfair and unjust to hold them responsible for the sad demise of that old woman. Law not only demands justice, but the justice must be equitable justice. So in order to establish equitable justice we cannot held responsible the o.p. for deficiency of service in this regard and only for that consideration they should not be held liable for the death of that old woman. Having due regard to the circumstances and in view of our discussion as made above following order is passed.

    Hence,

    Ordered,

    That the case is dismissed on contest and considering the circumstances no order is passed as to cost. Fees paid are correct.



    Supply copy of this order to the parties on payment of prescribed fees.
  • adv.singhadv.singh Senior Member
    edited February 2010
    Complaint Case No : 182 of 2009

    Date of Institution : 04.02.2009

    Date of Decision : 14.01.2010


    (1) Ranjot Singh son of Sh. Roopinder Singh, Resident of House No. 152, Sector 27-A, Chandigarh.

    (2) Roopinder Singh son of Sh. Jaspal Singh, Resident of House No. 152, Sector 27-A, Chandigarh.

    ……Complainant

    V E R S U S
    (1) Air India, through its Assistant Manager, Sh.R.K. Negi, SCO No. 162-164, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh.

    (2) Air India, through its Customer Relation Manager Mr. S. Dhinda, Jeevan Bharti Building, Tower-2, Cannaught Place, New Delhi.

    (3) M/s Regency Tours (P) Ltd., through its M.D. Sh. Neeraj Sastogi, 120-121, Desh Bandhu Gupta Market, Karol Bagh, New Delhi.

    (4) M/s Interface Tours & Travels (P) Ltd., through its M.D. Col. Malvinder Singh, 105, World Trade Centre, Barakhamba Road, Cannaught Place, New Delhi.

    (5) M/s Singapore Airlines, through its M.d., 9th Floor, Ashoka Estate, 24, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi – 110001.
    .…..Opposite Parties

    CORAM: SH.LAKSHMAN SHARMA PRESIDENT

    SH.ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI MEMBER
    PRESENT: Sh.Vishal Bali, Adv. for the Complainant.

    Sh.R.S. Khural, Adv. for OPs No. 1 & 2.

    Col. Malvinder Singh Guron, Director of OP No.4.

    OPs No. 3 & 5 Ex-parte.


    PER ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI, MEMBER


    Concisely put, Sh. Roopinder Singh- Complainant No. 2, being the father of Sh. Ranjot Singh - Complainant No. 1, got one confirmed E-ticket booked through OP No. 4 (Sub-Dealer) of OP No. 3 on 09.07.2008 of Air India Flight for Complainant No. 1 for going to Melbourne on 10/07/2008 and to return back on 16/12/2008, from Melbourne to New Delhi. The Complainants paid Rs.53,981/- and Ticket No. ETKT0985741819317, having PNR No. AI/J4EWH of Air India Flight No. 7407, was booked in the name of Mr. Ranjot Singh, Complainant No. 1 for going to Melbourne on 10.07.2008 at 23:10 PM from New Delhi (Annexure C-1). It was alleged that when the Complainants and their other family members reached New Delhi Airport from Chandigarh on 10.07.2008, in the evening, then Complainant No. 1 reported at Air India Airlines Counter, but the Officials present at the counter asked Mr. Ranjot Singh (Complainant No. 1) to report at Singapore Airlines Counter, as Singapore Airlines was an alliance airlines of Air India for going to Melbourne. On reaching Singapore Airlines counter, the officials of Singapore Airlines told the Complainants that there is no confirmation of the said ticket as per their records and hence, Complainant No. 1 could not be given Boarding Pass and further, asked the Complainants to contact the Air India counter and like this Complainant No. 1 was denied boarding the flight. In utter shock, the Complainants immediately contacted Air India office and got the status checked up, which showed that the said ticket purchased by the Complainant No. 2 for his son (Complainant No.1) was a confirmed ticket. Thereafter, the Duty Officer present at the counter of Air India went to check the status at Singapore Airlines counter, but the Officials present there told the Duty Officer that flight is heavily booked and they don’t have any seat and hence, complaint No. 1 cannot be allowed to board the flight. Ultimately, on 11.07.2008, i.e. the next day, the Complainant No. 2 was forced to buy another ticket of some other Airlines and that too at a higher price of Rs.73,850/- for Complainant No. 1 (Annexure C-2), as he was to reach Melbourne within two days and report there for some urgent work. It was alleged that when the OPs No. 1 & 2 were requested to refund the amount of the ticket, as Complainant No. 1 was not allowed to board the flight, they only agreed to pay some amount after deducting the commission of the Agent etc. A legal notice dated 11.09.2008 was also served upon the OPs, but to no avail. It was further averred that a belated vague reply dated 03.11.2008 was sent by OP No. 1 to the counsel for the Complainants wherein OPs have admitted that Complainant No. 1 was not allowed to board the Flight on 10.07.2008 (Annexure C-7) and accordingly, a refund was made to the Complainant by deducting commission of Rs.1550/-. Hence, this complaint, alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. In the end, the Complainant has prayed for the following reliefs:-

    i)

    Amount deducted by Airline Authorities at the time of refund

    Rs.1550.00

    ii)


    Difference in price of Ticket which Complainant had to purchase on the spot.
    Rs.19,869.00

    iii)


    Losses suffered by the Complainants.
    Rs.1,00,000.00

    iv)


    For mental harassment of the Complainants.


    Rs.2,00,000.00

    v)


    For physical harassment of the Complainants.
    Rs.1,25,000.00

    vi)


    Amount spent by Complainants in traveling from Chandigarh and for staying in Delhi for two days due to fault of the OPs.
    Rs.10,000.00

    vii)

    Litigation Expenses

    Rs.15,000.00

    T O T A L


    Rs.4,71,419.00

    2] Notice of the complaint was sent to OPs seeking their version of the case. OPs No. 3 and 5 did not turn up despite due service of notice, therefore, they were proceeded against exparte

    3] OPs No. 1 & 2 in their joint written statement/reply, while admitting the factual matrix of the case, pleaded that Complainants failed to substantiate by placing on record evidence that OP No. 4 was Sub-Dealer of OP No. 3, through whom the e-ticket was booked. The Bill No. 118, dated 09 July, 2008 for Rs.54,420/- was issued by AVS Group Travel and Tours and not by M/s Interface Tours & Travels Pvt. Ltd. Moreover, the amount of Rs.54,545/- was deposited in the account of M/s Interface Tours & Travels Pvt. Ltd., but the bill was issued by AVS Group Tours & Travels. The Sub-Dealers were not authorized by them to issue e-tickets. The Complainants were not consumers qua OPs No. 1 & 2 as the flight was operated by Singapore Airlines and OPs No. 1 & 2 were facilitators as marketing carriers. It was further pleaded that since the Complainant No. 1 could not board the booked flight of Singapore Airlines on 10.07.2008, the OPs No. 1 & 2 as goodwill gesture refunded the amount without any refund charges leviable. It was submitted that OPs NO. 1 & 2 were not liable to refund of service charges recovered by the booking agent, or sub-dealer, impleaded as OP No. 4. Further OP No. 4, in their reply had stated that the full amount of Rs.54,545/- was refunded in cash to the Complainant. While admitting the receipt of legal notice dated 11.9.2008 on behalf of the Complainant No.2, it was asserted that the same was suitably replied on 03.11.2008. The denial of seat by Singapore Airlines in flights on 10.7.2008 was beyond the control of the answering OPs. The Complainant instead of approaching the OPs No.1 & 2 or Singapore Airlines to provide alternative flight, opted for flight of their liking without approaching for next available flight. All other material contentions of the Complainant were controverted. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary costs.


    4] OP No. 4 in their reply while admitting the factual matrix of the case, pleaded that they being Sub-Dealer of OP No. 3 had just issued the confirmed e-ticket to Complainant No. 1 and it was the duty of the Airlines to provide seat and issue boarding pass to Complainant No. 1, hence they were not at all deficient in providing any service to the Complainants. It was asserted that no commission was deducted and full amount of Rs.54,545/- was refunded in cash to the Complainant. All other material contentions of the Complainant were controverted. Pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary costs.

    5] Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

    6] We have carefully gone through the entire case thoroughly, including the complaint and the relevant documents tendered by the complainant / OPs. We also heard the arguments put forth by the learned counsel for the Complainant and OP No. 1, 2 & 3. As a result of the detailed analysis of the entire case, the following points/issues have clearly emerged and certain conclusions/arrived at, accordingly:-

    i] The basic facts of the case in respect of the Complainants that the Complainant No. 2, being the father of Shri Ranjot Singh – Complainant No. 1, got one confirmed e-ticket booked from OP No. 4 (Sub-Dealer) of OP No. 3 on 09.07.2008 of Air India Flight for Complainant No. 1 for going to Melbourne (Australia) on 10.07.2008 and to return on 16.12.2008 from Melbourne to New Delhi, have all been admitted . Accordingly, the Complainants paid Rs.53,981/- and Ticket No. ETKT0985741819317, having PNR No. AI/J4EWH of Air India Flight No. 7407, was booked in the name of Mr. Ranjot Singh, Complainant No. 1 for going from New Delhi to Melbourne on 10.07.2008 at 23:10 PM from New Delhi. The allegation of the Complainant No.1 against the OPs is that when he and members of his family reached New Delhi Airport from Chandigarh on 10.7.2008 in the evening and reported at the Air India Airlines counter, they told him to report at Singapore Airlines counter, as Singapore Airlines was an alliance Airlines of Air India for going to Melbourne. But on reaching Singapore Airlines counter, the officials of the Singapore Airlines told him that there is no confirmation of the said ticket as per their records and hence, he could not be given a boarding pass. He was further advised to go back to Air India counter and in the entire process, Complainant No. 1 was denied boarding the flight. When the Complainant again contacted the Air India office to check the status of the ticket booked by him, he was told that he had a confirmed ticket, but finally, the Singapore Airlines told Air India officials that they were already heavily booked for the said flight and did not have a seat for the Complainant No.1. As per the Complainant, since he was not allowed to board the flight on 10.07.2008, he was compelled to buy another ticket of some other airlines at a price of Rs.73,850/- and he boarded the said flight the next day i.e. 11.07.2008, as he was required to reach Melbourne within 02 days for some urgent work. Subsequently, the Complainant asked for the refund of the amount, as he was denied boarding the flight and OP No. 4, who had booked the ticket on behalf of OP No. 3 for the Complainants, refunded the amount after deducting the Agent’s Commission of Rs.1550/-.


    ii] The main grievance of the Complainants against the OPs is that despite having a confirmed e-ticket, the Complainant No. 1 was not allowed to board the flight to go to Melbourne, which caused him immense harassment and financial loss, as he had to buy another air ticket of a different airlines at a much higher price and in the process, he had also to postpone his departure by one more day, so as to reach Melbourne within a period of 02 days to attend to some urgent work. The contention of the OPs in their written statement/ reply is that the e-ticket against Bill No. 118, dated 9th July, 2008, for Rs.54,420/- was issued by AVS Group Travel and Tours and not by M/s Interface Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd. Since M/s AVS Group Travel and Tours were only Sub-Dealers of M/s Interface Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd., they were not allowed to issue e-tickets. The OPs have also taken some preliminary objections in respect of the status of Complainant No. 2 as a consumer qua OP No. 1 & 2. Another contention of the OPs No. 1 & 2 is that the concerned flight missed by Complainant No. 1 was being operated by Singapore Airlines and OPs No. 1 & 2 were only facilitators as Marketing Carriers and further, when the Singapore Airlines could not accommodate the Complainant on 10.07.2008, the full amount of air ticket paid by the Complainants was refunded to them, without deducting even the refund charges i.e. the full sum of Rs.54,545/- was refunded in cash to the Complainant. The OPs have further alleged that the Complainant should have approached either OPs No. 1 & 2 or Singapore Airlines to provide an alternative flight, but he opted for a flight of his own liking of some other airlines, without availing the next available flight of the OPs. On these grounds, the OPs say that there is no deficiency of service on their part.

    iii] A detailed analysis of the entire case shows that the Complainants have done all, as was required for them in the sense that they had paid the full amount of the ticket in advance and also obtained a confirmed e-ticket, for traveling from New Delhi to Melbourne on 10.07.2008. This fact was confirmed not only by the Dealer/Sub Dealer of OPs No. 1 & 2, but also by OPs No. 1 & 2 themselves on the day of the flight i.e. 10.07.2008, at the New Delhi Airport. Therefore, the Complainant was not required to seek any further confirmation from any one in respect of the proposed flight. It is another matter that OPs No. 1 & 2 had some arrangement with Singapore Airlines, they themselves acting as Marketing Carrier on “Code Sharing Basis” and treating Singapore Airlines as the Operating Airlines. In any case, the Complainant is not concerned what internal arrangement OPs No. 1 & 2 had made with Singapore Airlines (OP No. 5). The Complainants paid money in full to OP No. 4, who are the Director Agents/ Dealers of OPs No. 1& 2. OP No. 4 had further authorized AVS Group Travel and Tours to issue the confirmed e-ticket to the Complainant, which they had done.
    v] Another plea taken by OP No. 1 & 2 that it is clearly mentioned in the ticket docket, as well as the website that times shown in for flight is not guaranteed and form no part of the contract. In support of their contention, they have quoted Condition No. 9 of the Contract of Travel, which is reproduced hereinbelow:-

    The Condition No. 9 of contract of travel printed on the ticket specifically states that “Carrier undertakes to use its best efforts to carry the passenger and baggage with reasonable dispatch. Times shown in timetables or elsewhere are not guaranteed and form no part of this contract. Carrier may without notice substitute alternate carriers or aircraft, and may alter or omit stopping places shown on the ticket in case of necessity. Schedules are subject to change without notice. Carrier assumes no responsibility for making connections.”

    v] The OPs No. 1 & 2 further say that the contract to carry Complainant No.1 in the booked flight was with Singapore Airlines and, therefore, they are not responsible, if there is any lapse on the part of Singapore Airlines. This argument of OPs No. 1 & 2 is just not tenable, as it has been established by a number of authorities that the Principal is fully liable for the acts of omission and commission of the Agent. In this connection, there is an authority by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, clearly stating that Air India (Petitioner) was liable for the negligence of the Agent. The head note of the said authority is quoted below:-



    “III (2003) CPJ 123 (NC)



    NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW, DELHI.

    AIR INDIA

    Petitioner

    VERSUS



    HARPREET SINGH

    ---- Respondent

    Revision Petition No. 1231 of 2003 – Decided on 2.5.2003.

    Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 2(1)(g), 21(b) – Airlines – Deficiency in service – Complainant having confirmed ticket, issued by Travel Agent, denied boarding – Compensation awarded by Forum, upheld by State Commission – Hence revision – Contention, Air India not liable for fault of agent – Contention against basic principle of law, and Contract Act – Air India liable for negligence of agent – Passenger not required to re-confirm okay ticket within 72 hours of purchase – Deficiency in service proved – Orders of lower Forums upheld (Para 4).



    Result: Revision Petition dismissed.”



    vi] In another case of Indian Airlines Ltd. & Anr. Versus Dr. Savita Malhotra and Ors., the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, had dismissed a Revision Petition, in which the lower Fora had awarded a compensation of Rs.20,000/- with costs of Rs.3,000/- awarded by the District Forum, which was upheld in the Appeal at the State Commission, although in that case, the flight being full due to over booking, boarding passes were not issued, but the Complainants were provided seats for the next flight with hotel accommodation. The head note of the said authority is quoted below:-

    “2009 (2) CPC 646
    NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW, DELHI.

    Revision Petition No.700 of 2005

    Indian Airlines Limited & Anr.

    Petitioners

    VERSUS

    Dr. Savita Malhotra & Ors.

    ---- Respondents

    Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 2(1)(g), 21(b) – Air flight – Complainant purchased confirmed air tickets for flight on Delhi – Ranchi route – Flight being full due to over booking boarding passes were not issued but Complainant were provided seats for next flight with hotel accommodation – District Forum awarded compensation of Rs.20,000/- with cost of Rs.3,000/- which was upheld in appeal – Taking into view the decision delivered in M/s Unique Trader’s case decided on 21.03.2002, compensation awarded by Fora below cannot be construed to be on higher side – Revision stands dismissed. (Paras 7-8-9)

    Cases Referred:-

    1. M/s Air France V/s M/s Unik Traders, First Appeal No. 518 of 1995, decided on 21.3.2002.”



    7] Keeping in view the above stated detailed analysis of the entire case, it is beyond an iota of doubt that the OPs, especially OPs No. 1 & 2, have been deficient in service qua the Complainants and have also indulged in unfair trade practice by denying their liability for the acts of omission and commission on the part of their Agent. The Principal cannot just get away by shifting the liability for negligence and consequent deficiency in service first to a sister airlines i.e. Singapore Airlines and later to their own Agent i.e. OP No. 3/4. It is a matter entirely inter se among the Opposite Parties and the Complainants have nothing to do with it. If at all, OPs No. 1 & 2 have to sort the issue, they can do so amongst themselves i.e. OPs No. 1 & 2 on the one side and OPs No. 3 to 5 on the other. The Complainants have no role to play in all this. It is absolutely clear that the Complainants have not got an efficient, fair and good service, which they deserved and were entitled to from OPs No. 1 & 2, after making full payment for the e-ticket in advance to OP No.4, for which they must be adequately compensated. As such, the present complaint has a lot of weight, merit and substance. We, therefore, decide the complaint in favour of the Complainants and against the OPs. So far as the status of Complainant No.2 as a “Consumer” is concerned, it was categorically stated during arguments as well as in the averments/ pleadings of the Complainants that the entire payment for the ticket was paid by Complainant No. 2 on behalf of Complainant No. 1, who is in fact the beneficiary in the present case. Therefore, the status of Complainant No. 2, as a “Consumer”, in any case cannot be questioned or challenged.

    8] Keeping in view the above, we pass the following orders.

    The OPs, jointly and severally, shall make the following payments to the Complainants:-

    (i) The sum of Rs.1550/- as the amount deducted by the OPs at the time of making refund of the price of the e-ticket paid by the Complainants at the time of issuance of ticket.

    (ii) The difference in price of the new ticket i.e. Rs.19,869/-, which the Complainant had to purchase on the spot for another flight after the OPs had denied him the boarding pass for taking the flight of Singapore Airlines on 10.07.2008.

    (iii) To pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing physical harassment, mental agony and pain to the Complainant, on account of denial of seat in the flight of Singapore Airlines on 10.07.2008, and also on account of forcing the Complainants to postpone the flight by one day for 11.07.2008.

    (iv) The OPs shall pay litigation costs of Rs.5,000/- to the Complainants.

    9] The aforesaid order be complied with by the OPs within a period of 04 weeks from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, they shall pay the sum of Rs.71,419/- along with interest @18% per annum from the date on which the Complainant was denied the boarding pass i.e. 10.07.2008, till the date of realization, besides paying the cost of litigation at Rs.5,000/-.

    10] Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.
  • edited May 2010
    I purchased a ticket from New delhi to moscow (Ticket No. AI 098 44249428934 ) from Air India on 4th January , my flight was on 6th January 2010, i was told the excess baggage charges as Rs 325 per Kilogram , but i was charged Rs . 14140 for 7 KGs @ Rs 2020 per KG at IGI Airport and i was not informed that the flight was merged with AEROFLOAT. Kindly look into this ,matter.

    Regards

    Ramandeep Singh

    (M) 9811431264
    9810445130
  • rdhanekulardhanekula Junior Member
    edited May 2010
    I want to complaint against the ground crew who tortured me on my recent trip to India. May I know the procedure to complain.

    Any kind soul please look in to my case.

    I am a student. I traveled recently from Chicago to Hyderabad on April 6th, 2010 and returned to Chicago on May 18th. My cousin who traveled in the same sector on April 29th, informed me that I can carry an extra bag as I have a student visa and a valid I-20 form. I confirmed this information by calling the customer care number 1800227722. It was confirmed by them twice. I took three bags each 23 kilos to the Hyderabad airport with me on 18th May. The lady at the check in counter checked my luggage and just before printing the boarding pass she said I have to pay for the extra bag as I purchased the ticket in USA. I told her my sister purchased it in Bangalore online through Air India website with my father's credit card. But she was reluctant to listen.

    I went to my dad who was waiting for me to check in among the visitors. I took money to pay for it. When I went back she was busy so I went to another counter, this time a guy. He said I need not pay any money and then checked in my luggage after checking my student visa and the I-20. I proceeded to boarding after giving the Indian currency to my dad and just had 2000Rs with me. As I was about to board the flight my name was announced at the boarding counter, I went to them and there was the guy who checked in my luggage. He took my boarding pass and with out giving me any information he started walking away. I asked him why he was taking my boarding pass, he asked me to follow him saying that there is a controversy about my luggage. I asked him what it was but he didnt reply, he went ahead and canceled my Emigration check and security check and boarding pass. Then his superior Mr. Kodali asked me to pay for the third bag. I asked why should I pay? he repeated the same old story that because I purchase it in Chicago. I told him I purchase it online through Air India website. They did not listen to me, I even told them I had a proof in my email and also asked them to check the credit card used to pay for the ticket. They said they wont do that and even threatened me that if I do not pay I will have to stay back while the flight will leave with out me. I was forced to pay. I obliged to pay in this situation and they asked me to pay only in Indian currency. I had to exchange 100 dollars (that I purchased 1@ 45.5) for one @ 41.52. Moreover I was charged an equivalent of 143$ while the fee for extra bag @23kilos in only 125 $. After all these events, when I returned to board the flight every one in the flight were observing me as if I did some crime. I had the most embarrassing moment in my life.

    I want to know how I should proceed regarding this. I have been mentally tortured. I was charged (excessively 143 $ instead of 125 )for the bag that I am supposed to carry free of charge. They did not heed to what I said. I was pulled out of the boarding line as if I had done a crime. I want to file a case in consumer court. Please guide me over this.

    Regards,
    Dhanekula
  • rdhanekulardhanekula Junior Member
    edited May 2010
    I want to complaint against the ground crew who tortured me on my recent trip to India. May I know the procedure to complain.

    Any kind soul please look in to my case.

    I am a student. I traveled recently from Chicago to Hyderabad on April 6th, 2010 and returned to Chicago on May 18th. My cousin who traveled in the same sector on April 29th, informed me that I can carry an extra bag as I have a student visa and a valid I-20 form. I confirmed this information by calling the customer care number 1800227722. It was confirmed by them twice. I took three bags each 23 kilos to the Hyderabad airport with me on 18th May. The lady at the check in counter checked my luggage and just before printing the boarding pass she said I have to pay for the extra bag as I purchased the ticket in USA. I told her my sister purchased it in Bangalore online through Air India website with my father's credit card. But she was reluctant to listen.

    I went to my dad who was waiting for me to check in among the visitors. I took money to pay for it. When I went back she was busy so I went to another counter, this time a guy. He said I need not pay any money and then checked in my luggage after checking my student visa and the I-20. I proceeded to boarding after giving the Indian currency to my dad and just had 2000Rs with me. As I was about to board the flight my name was announced at the boarding counter, I went to them and there was the guy who checked in my luggage. He took my boarding pass and with out giving me any information he started walking away. I asked him why he was taking my boarding pass, he asked me to follow him saying that there is a controversy about my luggage. I asked him what it was but he didnt reply, he went ahead and canceled my Emigration check and security check and boarding pass. Then his superior Mr. Kodali asked me to pay for the third bag. I asked why should I pay? he repeated the same old story that because I purchase it in Chicago. I told him I purchase it online through Air India website. They did not listen to me, I even told them I had a proof in my email and also asked them to check the credit card used to pay for the ticket. They said they wont do that and even threatened me that if I do not pay I will have to stay back while the flight will leave with out me. I was forced to pay. I obliged to pay in this situation and they asked me to pay only in Indian currency. I had to exchange 100 dollars (that I purchased 1@ 45.5) for one @ 41.52. Moreover I was charged an equivalent of 143$ while the fee for extra bag @23kilos in only 125 $. After all these events, when I returned to board the flight every one in the flight were observing me as if I did some crime. I had the most embarrassing moment in my life.

    I want to know how I should proceed regarding this. I was mentally tortured. I was charged (excessively 143 $ instead of 125 )for the bag that I am supposed to carry free of charge. They did not heed to what I said. I was pulled out of the boarding line as if I had done a crime. I want to file a case in consumer court. Please guide me over this.

    regards,

    Dhanekula
  • kams21kams21 Junior Member
    edited July 2010
    I travel very regularly for the past 2-3 years in Thai Airways to Bangkok,
    Kulalumpur and Shanghai as our APAC has offices here. In my many trips the
    last on to Ho Chi Minh thru your airways was a very disturbing one to say
    so. I am going thru so much of mental pressure with thai airways.

    I travelled by TG338 on the 20th June 2010 to Bangkok in J class. And from
    there to Ho Chi Minh by TG 550 in J class. We checked in 2 suitcases at
    Chennai. On Arrival at Ho chi Minh city, we found one of the bag meddled
    with. We rushed to thai office and realized that nobody was to attended to
    us. On a direction by some volunteer there we went to the lost and found
    counter. I narrated the issue, the lady at the counter spoke to somebody
    in thai airways and on her/his direction took a complaint. And advised me to go to city
    office the next day, as 20th was Sunday. I went there on 21st, met the
    administrative officer. Again narrated the issue asked her to give me an
    acknowledgement to me on the missing bag and valuables inside. She gave a
    letter stating 'Whomsoever it may concern'. She asked us to contact
    Chennai office and Insurance office with these. I came back to Chennai in
    TG551 and TG337 in J class on 23rd June 2010 at 11.30pm. I went to the thai
    city office in Chennai and gave the letter for your perusal. And I
    realized what a con the thai customer service executives and airline was.

    Then I recollected the entire incidence, it was a shocker and I did not
    realize how low levels can thai airways can go. The account by account of the
    play, played by thai airways.

    1. As soon as I screen by bag and was walking towards the check in counter in Chennai, I found a strange volunteer
    of thai walk towards me and helps me to check in. I thought it was good
    curtsey, but unfortunately the cheating seem to have started from
    here. Later people told me that it is a network of airways and AAI people and
    security to scan bags with valuables and steal. I am sure the stealing act can be seen from the footage from security and airport surveillance to nail the
    case.
    2. Once I realized I lost the bag with cash and valuables, when I went to
    lost and found, the way the staff behaviour floored me and thought she was
    helping me but realized she on some of thai's executive directing her was
    cheating me big time. She took the complaint half baked asked me to sign
    on the paper. But before issuing the copy to me she scribbled something on the top!
    The she gave the paper, she has written it as curtsey case! What a cheat.
    If she wants to write she should have written before I signed? When asked
    she said it is for internal only no problem for you sir!!!! All problems
    to me only!
    3. I trusted and then went to your city office on 21st June 2010, showed
    the letter and asked her what can be done? She gave another letter stating
    that the 'whomsoever'. I bought this letter to Chennai and met the manager
    here, he now says this letter is of no use and this letter is not as per
    our policy so we cannot do anything.

    I having lost almost INR100000/- feeling miserable for having trusted airways and AAI.

    I request you to take this seriously and help fight this goons in the airports. I also
    lodged a police complaint for no use.

    I am aware of the regulation on cash and valuables, but today with
    scanners and surveillance cameras the truth can be found out. We are not living in 19th century. When the cameras can spot drugs and weapons and the department helps to nab people, there should be a way to nab these culprits as well. There is a racket going on in airports. They will steal and hide under air travel regulations which are pre historic by nature.

    I am again flying thai airways on 2nd August to Shanghai. God help me!

    I trust your organization to help me recover, book the culprits and
    ensure safety of checked in bags of every customer.

    ONWARD Seat numbers: 16A and 12J,
    RETURN: Seat numbers: 14B and 22B

    Baggage Tag: AI721124
    File reference: SGNTG21205

    I trust you will help nab those hiding behind loop holes of the rules.
  • edited November 2011
    I cancelled my ticket on 25th oct 2011 through telephone service.I was asked to send an email to <eCommerce@airindia.in> and mention all the details of booking.I did the same.It has been one month and i have not received the refund amount.I keep sending the mail and get the reply that bank has made the mistake and some crap.This kind of service is not expected from the airlines like air India.They just can't bluff the customer.Nowadays no bank takes one month to put the amount back.Customer care is there when you go for booking,but why cancellation is a big issue when customer pay the cancellation charge.
  • edited December 2011
    Baggage damaged by air india
    Submitted by: Shabbir Sheikh
    Category: Travel & Airlines
    Complaint against: Air India
    Complaint Number: 24217
    Amount loss/claim: Rs. 4,600
    Support Shabbir Sheikh Click:
    I was traveling back from frankfurt 23rd june 2011-delhi 24rd june 2011-kolkata 24rd june 2011 by air india ai120 baggage tag number ai636443,ticket:ai/Etkt 098 5172709723 ai frequent flyer aif748198 reservation number(s) ai/Y01sb
    however I had to receive my baggage at the arrival point in delhi and then take it to the checking counter for kolkata. On receiving my baggage in delhi I saw that my ruck sack purchased on march 2011 in germany for euro 70 (inr4600) was ripped, cuts and holes from almost all the sides and my bag pocked chain was ripped off too. I brought this to the notice of the airlines staff in delhi who said that they can take my complain once I reach kolkata,
    on reaching kolkata I complained to the air india desk about my damage baggage. The complain was received on 24th june 2011 and the vendor from air india came to my house to pics my bag to repair it on the 25th june 2011.
    On 19th july 2011 the vendor of air india came to deliver my bag after repairing it. However I observed that my bag was cut from all the sides which decreased the size of my bag by 6-9 inch and there were still some visible holes on my bag with cross stitches over it .
    I DID not receive the bag and asked the gentleman to take the bag back to air india as my bag was completely destroyed and out of shape.
    I called the air india office to bring this to their notice, however the staff from air india is refusing to either give me any replacement of my bag or compensate me for the damage and is forcing me to accept the bag which is completely out of shape.
    Please look into the matter as the customers are duped and cheated by this profit making organisation... Till date i havent received my baggage and they hang up when i call them and now i am in Germany what should i do ???
  • freek5freek5 Junior Member
    edited December 2011
    Hi,
    Last wednesday I had a trip to australia and faced bad time with the ground crew.They charged me double the fair of luggage charges I don no the exact reason for charging that much amount thought of filing a case on them.Higher officials should take care of all these people and stop these things.
  • 7vipink7vipink Junior Member
    edited February 2012
    Hi,
    I and my wife had a flight from Kochin to Agatti on 15th Feb 2012. We received a sms a day before telling us that our flight is delayed by 2 hours. When we went to the counter to get our boarding passes we were shocked to hear that we can't fly. We were asked to stay in the accommodation provided by air india and wait for further communication. Officials didn't even confirm the flight even the next day because some parliamentary committee was flying in their aircraft and they were not sure whether they can arrange another plane for us. Airindia had an option of buying kingfisher airlines tickets for next day and give us them at that time, which they didn't.

    Late in the night they informed us that flight will go next day at ard 11:45 am. This flight ultimately flew around 3 30 pm. They indeed brought some kingfisher tickets which they gave to some of the fellow passengers. Kingfisher flight flew around 2 hours prior to air india one. This was not informed us at all and they didn't disclose their selection criteria of selecting those passengers who were given preferential treatment.

    We were going to Agatti for 4 days, and because of this more than a day was wasted for us.

    I want airindia to compensate us for all this. Also they should have a duty of inform passengers in advance in such situations. We could have stayed one more day in delhi. As we came to kochin from delhi on the same day.

    Vipin
  • mann.dangermann.danger Junior Member
    edited May 2012
    Hi ,

    My name is Tarsem Singh. I am working at muscat with a telecom company from Aug 2008.

    Below is my complaint detail.

    I travelled in Air India flight IC886 from MUSCAT-DELHI on 05 Feb'2010. I found my luggage missing ( luggage TAG number B5-140596 ) and loged a complaint with Air India at the Air port(IGI Airport Delhi). after 20 days i came back to muscat.

    my luggage was containing things near about Rs 40 to 50 thousands. i had lots of email communications with Air India. after that they passed my claim for USD 280 only. but still i didn't receive any amount from Air India.

    following are some information sent by Air India.

    On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:46 AM, NR CustomerService <ialcsnr@airindia.in> wrote:
    Dear Mr. Singh,

    We have received your claim and the same is being processed. We are under the process of investigation, kindly bear with us till such time. In the meanwhile you are requested to kind forward us copy of boarding card, copy of ticket to enable us to consider your claim as per rules.

    Thanks,

    Bisht

    .On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:24 PM, NR CustomerService <ialcsnr@airindia.in> wrote:
    [FONT=Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Dear Tarsem,

    Reference your trailing mail on the above subject. The cheque has already been sent to you on 14.07.2010 at the address provided by you on PIR through our Station Manager Amritsar. In case it is still not received please liaise with Station Manager, ATQ.

    Thanks

    regards,


    Bisht
    [/FONT]

    After that i have also visited Air India Amritsar Office 2 or 3 times. But every time they told that they didn't receive any cheque.

    then i sent following emails to Air India but they didn't reply my emails.





    on Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:23 AM


    Dear Bisht,

    Still i didnt receive any cheque. Plz look in to the matter.and also plz give the email id of Amritsar Admin so that i can check with them tooo.

    Plz do the needful ASAP.



    on Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 9:22 AM

    Dear Bisht,

    How are you. Dear you can see the following mails, it is near abt 10 months over my luggage missing..still i didn't receive compensation. Is this Air India Service to satisfy her customers. Dear my luggage was containing things near about Rs 40 thousands but Air India has approved just $280 for my claim, that much amount also i didn't receive ...still m waiting for the cheque..dear plz do the needful ASAP.


    Regards,
    Tarsem Singh



    on Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 11:51 AM

    Dear Bisht / Air India Team,

    I am very disappointed with the your customer service policies. Can you spare a little time to read the whole mails of our conversation. I didn't received any cheque from Air India . and 2 years are about to go the matter started. Air India has approved a claim of $280 only when the things were about $1000 i lost, even then i haven't received this much amount since a long time has gone.


    Even i have visited Air India office in Amritsar 3 or 4 times . they just tell me that they didn't receive any cheque from Dehli on my name. Even they have tried to call Dehli Office but that time no response.




    Can you please check ,where the cheque is lying now or delivered .. I am waiting for your reply.


    Regards,
    Tarsem Singh




    these emails were sent by me... but i didn't receive any reply..

    Can anyone help me in this matter...

    Thanking you in advance,

    Tarsem Singh
    Muscat No. +968 99385210

    Post Box 1676
    Postal Code 114
    Muttrah
    Sultanate of Oman.

  • int243int243 Junior Member
    edited October 2012
    jetradar.com/?marker=15048 is the only place I go to search flights now, after consistently finding them to find the best deals. They don't 'promote' any particular airline, but are totally transparent, plus they include the extra fees and taxes that you know you have to pay but many other 'comparison' sites leave off. This is helpful, as you can make a fair assessment of which is the best price.
  • edited February 2013
    I traveled on 3rd feb 2013 from Delhi to Frankfurt by Air India flight AI121 ,i checked in 3 luggage at Delhi terminal 3 on Air India counter from Delhi to Tobago but i recieved only 2 bags at Tobago airport ,i contacted to condor airlines who suppose to transfer luggage from frankfurt to tobago but they not giving any answer .
  • edited July 2014
    Respected Sir / Madam,

    I have purchased a ticket from Kolkata - JFK, New York for 8th August 2014 online. My ticket reads :

    TRAVEL INFORMATION
    FLIGHT Depart Arrive CLASS FARE BASIS NVB* NVA* BAGGAGE ALLOWANCE
    AI 618 / AI 101 Booked

    Kolkata (CCU), Fri, 8 Aug 2014, 13:35
    Terminal 2 Mumbai (BOM), Fri, 8 Aug 2014, 17:50,
    Terminal 2 Mumbai (BOM), Fri, 8 Aug 2014, 21:30,
    Sat, 9 Aug 2014, 07:25, Terminal 1A New York (JFK) Terminal 4
    Economy - V, Economy - L

    Now, I came to know that this flight goes from Kolkata - Hyderabad - Mumbai. Departs Mumbai at 21:30 hrs to New Delhi. Departs Delhi at 01:45 hrs.

    When I called up Air India, they say I have to cancel the complete ticket. Pay 5000 INR as cancellation fees and buy the same ticket at the present fare which is almost double the price I had paid initially. If I have to go to Delhi only, then why go all around India to reach there leaving much earlier. I would rather take an Air India flight from Kolkata to Delhi at 20.:15 hrs reaching Delhi at 22:30 hrs. and still have ample time to take the flight (AI101) to JFK.

    Hope my grievance will be sorted.

    Regards.

    Sayantani
  • farha_nasirfarha_nasir Junior Member
    edited July 2014
    Dear Sir,


    This is to bring toyour notice the unexpected humiliation faced by me at the SharjahInternational Airport by The AirIndiaExpress staff.
    I had a directflight from Sharjah to Lucknow on the 13th of July at 18:25 hours. Iwas inside the airport at 15:30 hours and had my Luggage submittedand boarding pass issued at around 15:45 hours. My boarding passclearly stated that the boarding for my flight would be done fromgate no. 5. So I was at Gate no. 5 an hour before the actual boardingtime. An hour later as I joined the boarding queue at gate no. 5 tomy surprise i was informed that the queue was for Qatar Airways andnot for AirIndiaExpress. AirIndia was now supposed to leave at gateno. 20. And i had just 15 min before my flight flew. Worriedly, Ibegan searching for any airindia staff at the gate but soon Irealized how futile my attempt was. It was a shamefful event thatmany a Local Airport staff were all ears to help me yet there was noairIndia staff there, none.


    The Local staffquickly rushed me to Gate no. 20. Within 15 minutes I was at gate no.20. Again to my surprise there was no one at the gate. After Longsearching I found a Lady, an airIndia staff, who arrogantly said shecould not help me. The staff at the counter said they could not helpat the moment as they were breaking their fast. No concern had theythat I had a fast too and hadn't open it yet and was with my youngdaughter, both of us exhausted.


    Quickly I called myhusband who had to travel again from Dubai to Sharjah because of thisissue. It was very important for me to reach Lucknow the next day dueto several reason. My daughter's school, My son's counselling, all ofwhich I missed all because of you guys. All travelling agencies wereclosed at that time so somehow i got another ticket for the next day.


    I have beentravelling via flights for the past 25 years and not once have Ifaced such humiliation. All flights, literary all flight try theirbest to reach their passengers at the time of boarding, be it byannouncement or call or sending someone to search for them, but noneof this was offered by your staff.


    I was shocked at tohow could they people change your boarding gate like that, and ifthey did how could there be no person of theirs at the Gate no. 5 toguide other passengers to the new gate.

    I really look forward to have my case resolved. Thank you.






    Passenger Names
    Farzana Khatoon andZainab Nasir


    13th July ticketconfirmation number: 1J5G0C
    flight no.IX-184(Sharjah to Lucknow)


    14th July ticketconfirmation number: N1CGTE
    flight no.IX-184(Sharjah to Lucknow)






    Farzana Khatoon
    106, Naaz Cinemaroad, Aminabad, Lucknow. 226018
    +918933988889
  • edited September 2014
    Hello,

    I tried to book Emirates flight tickets for myself and my infant to fly from Thiruvananthapuram to London Heathrow using the Emirates Online Booking site. I used real time Net banking option using HDFC account. Once I was directed to HDFC site and I made the payment, Emirates site gave me a message that Transaction has failed because the bank has not approved it and I should inform the bank that they should approve the transaction if I want to purshase the ticket on a fresh attempt. I did not receive any tickets. I immediately checked my bank account online and found that money is deducted. I called in Emirates helpline and the informed transaction is not through and I should be contacting the Bank. I called the bank phone banking and they informed that if the transaction has failed then I will get the money back to my account within 48 hours. After 48 hours, money was still not credited. I again reached phone banking. Then they informed I should wait until 5 working days, if I do not get the money back to my account, I should visit the nearest branch of HDFC bank. After 5 working days since I did not receive the money, I visited the bank. There they asked me to wait for 2 more working days since RBI direction is 7 working days. If I still do not get the money credited, then I can reach the customer care and file a complaint. I waited for 2 more days with no use. After 7 working days, I reached the HDFC customer care and filed a case. They told that the case will be resoled within 7 working days. After 5 days, I received a call from bank that Bank has transacted the money to Emirates and it is Emirates who have to give me a refund for the failed purchase. Bank gave me the Transaction ID. I reached the Emirates helpline once again, they after checking with the concerned team reconfirmed that the money did not come through and it was definitely a failed transaction and they do not owe me any money.

    I am not sure what I should do now. Both HDFC bank and Emirates are not ready to take any responsibility in this matter and are directing me to each other when I try to reach them. Please guide me what should I do now to get my money back? I have to leave India in a few days time and need to sort this out before I leave.

    Any help is appreciated.

    Thanks
    sresree
Sign In or Register to comment.