Kerala

Kannur

CC/216/2022

Ms.Muthamma Mukkatira Kaveriappa, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Air India Express Limited(AIEL) - Opp.Party(s)

K.M.Pradeepnath

07 Mar 2024

ORDER

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
KANNUR
 
Complaint Case No. CC/216/2022
( Date of Filing : 04 Aug 2022 )
 
1. Ms.Muthamma Mukkatira Kaveriappa,
D/o Shri.M.D.Kaveriappa,Chamundi Estate,Nalvathoklu Village,Virajpet Taluk,Kodagu District,Krnataka.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Air India Express Limited(AIEL)
Rep.by its Chairman,Corporate Head Quaters,Air India Express Building,Gandhi Square,DH Road,Kochi-682016.
2. Air India Express (AIEL)
By its Manager,Secondary Hub,Kannur International Airport,Mattannur,Kannur-670702.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. RAVI SUSHA PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Moly Kutty Mathew MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Sajeesh. K.P MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 07 Mar 2024
Final Order / Judgement

SMT. RAVI SUSHA: PRESIDENT

Complainant has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, for getting an order directing opposite parties to refund the ticket fare incurred in the 2nd travel Rs.5,221/- together with compensation for the mental agony, caused to the complainant due to the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the side of opposite parties.

            The brief facts of the case of complainant are that the complainant is ordinarily working in Dubai and her employer, Metropolitan Hotel Dubai LLC booked to and fro ticket from Dubai to Kannur and back as part of the annual perquisite.  The ticket was booked by the complainant’s husband’s employer through travel agency M/s Trust Travel and Tourism LLC, Dubai.  On 3rd January 2021, the complainant travelled from Dubai to her native place Kodagu in Karnataka via Kannur Airport by Air India express flight No. IX-1744.  While retuning on 10th February 2021, the complainant had a confirmed ticket for the sector Kannur to Dubai by Air India Express Flight No. IX-1743 at 21.50 hrs.  The complainant paid an amount of AED 1090 equal to Rs.21,767/- on the booking date 13/12/2020  for the to and fro journey for the confirmed ticket and hired services of the OPs in transporting her from Dubai to Kannur on 03/01/2020 and return journey Kannur to Dubai on 10/02/2021 by their flight.  As per requirement the complainant had under gone the Covid 19 PCR-RT test at Kodagu Institute of Medical Sciences and had a negative report with her at the Kannur Air port, the complainant was checked-in and a boarding pass was issued to her.  Later the complainant was checked-in and a boarding pass was issued to her.  Later the complainant was informed that she cannot board the flight since her Covid -19 test report is not as per the required format, it is over 72 hours old and hence not valid for the flight.  The boarding pass was taken away from the complainant.  The complainant was also informed that she should contact them the next date to rebook her ticket to Dubai.  Since it was always known to all the RT-PCR test is valid for 96 hours.  The next day morning 11/02/2021 she went to Appolo Hospital in Kannur and gave an RT-PCR Covid 19 test.  As soon as the complainant was informed that the test result is negative, she went to Kannur Airport to rebook her ticket to Dubai.  At Kannur Air port the complainant was initially informed that the ticket would additionally cost Rs.11,600,/- over and above to the earlier  paid amount of Rs.10,883/-  for the return flight already paid on booking.  The lapse by the Air India Express supervisor/manager is not attending to the complainant to delay of about two hours during which the ticket prize escalated to Rs.15,221/-.  The above mentioned unpleasant situation arised was due to deficient service, unfair practice, mismanagement and non communication by Air India Express.  Hence this complaint.

After receiving notices OPs entered appearance through their counsel and filed written version denying the allegations raised by the complainant against them.  It is submitted that the Covid 19 pandemic had prompted several countries to induce travel restriction. The Dubai Supreme committee of crisis and Disaster Management, directed the mandatory requirement of RT-PCR negative certificate that did not exceed 72 hours from the time of sample collection, for travelling to Dubai.  It is humbly submitted that the instruction provided to the complainant by the OP airlines was in pursuance to this direction, it is correct that the complainant had produced RT-PCR negative certificate but it respectfully submitted that the said certificate was in violation of the guidelines prescribed by the OP. The afore said change made by the Dubai Government was implemented by the OP from 31/01/2021.  OP had produced Ext.B1 to prove their contention.  On verification of Ext.B1, it is seen that validity for RT-PCR for Dubai reduced to 72 hours effective 31/01/2021.  Further specifically stated the validity period of PCR tests has been reduced from 96 hours to 72 hours.  OPs submitted that the OPs had to comply with the restrictions and guidelines that were imposed by different governments from time to time with respect to the flights to the said countries or else it would be liable to pay fines as penalty.  It is stated that the averment of the complainant that the RT-PCR test is valid for 96 hours is incorrect.  The averment that the ticket price escalating to Rs.15,221/- is absolutely false and hence denied.  It is submitted that the complainant insisted on waiting until her Covid negative results arrived to rebook the ticket.  The Senior Officer of Airport Services of the OP contacted and informed the complainant that the flight was filling fast and the current fare was also informed.  There has been no instance of deficiency of service, unfair practice, mismanagement.  Further the averment that the complainant received no communication from Air India Express either by telephone call or email or SMS, is incorrect and hence denied.  The OPs are not liable to pay any amount whatsoever to the complainant. The OPs had caused the issuance of a reply notice through their counsel, to the legal notice issued by the complainant stating the true facts pertaining to the allegations raised against them.  Hence, prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

Complainant has filed her proof affidavit and documents.  Examined as Pw1and the documents got marked as Ext.A1 to A7.  Pw1 was subject to cross-examination by OP.  On the side of OPs Exts.B1 to B3 were marked (subject to proof).  After that the learned counsels of both parties made argument.

The case of complainant is that the complainant hired services of the OPs in transporting her from Dubai to Kannur on 03/01/2021. And return journey Kannur to Dubai on 10/02/2021 by OP’s flight.  Further as per requirement, the complainant had under gone the Covid 19 PCR-RT test at Kodagu Institute of Medical Sciences and had a negative report with her at the Kannur Air port, the complainant was checked-in and a boarding pass was issued to her.  Later the complainant was checked-in and a boarding pass was issued to her.  Later the complainant was informed that she cannot board the flight since her Covid -19 test report is not as per the required format, it is over 72 hours old and hence not valid for the flight.  The boarding pass was taken away from the complainant.  The complainant was also informed that she should contact them the next date to rebook her ticket to Dubai. Complainant alleged that the RT-PCR test is valid for 96 hours, and hence the action of OPs, taken away her boarding pass and banned her from travelling to Kannur, amounts to deficiency in service.  Further alleged that due to the delay of two hours in attending the complainant’s 2nd travel, the ticket prize enhanced to Rs.15,221/-.  So she had to pay the excess ticket fare.

The OPs denied the allegations of the complainant.  OPs contended that the OPs had to comply with the restrictions and guidelines that were imposed by different governments from time to time with respect to the flights to the said countries or else it would be liable to pay fines as penalty.  It is stated that the averment of the complainant that the RT-PCR test is valid for 96 hours is incorrect.  The Dubai Supreme committee of crisis and Disaster Management, directed the mandatory requirement of RT-PCR negative certificate that did not exceed 72 hours from the time of sample collection, for travelling to Dubai.  It is humbly submitted that the instruction provided to the complainant by the OP airlines was in pursuance to this direction, OP admitted that the complainant had produced RT-PCR negative certificate but that the said certificate was in violation of the guidelines prescribed by the OP.  The afore said change made by the Dubai Government was implemented by the OP from 31/01/2021.  OP had produced Ext.B1 to prove their contention.  On verification of Ext.B1, it is seen that “validity for RT-PCR for Dubai reduced to 72 hours effective 31/01/2021”.  Further specifically stated “the validity period of PCR tests has been reduced from 96 hours  to 72 hours”.  Ext.B2 is the true copy of press release from Media office of the Govt. of Dubai.  Ext.B3 shows that the said decision of Dubai Supreme Committee has been published in the News paper “the Times of India” dated 28/01/2021.

            It is fact that complainant had undergone the Covid 19 RT-PCR test on 08/02/2021, and 72 hours was over when she reported at Kannur AIRPORT for check –in.  From Ext.B1, from 31/01/2021 onwards the validity for RTPCR test was reduced to 72 hours from 96 hours. OP contended that all passengers flying to Dubai from same date (31/01/2021)  were liable to comply with the said restrictions.  So there is no deficiency on the part of OP, declaring the Covid 19 test report submitted by the complainant (Ext.A1) is invalid.  Ext.B2 and B3 reveal that the said information was published by OP through news paper and Media.  Hence from the above said facts, we can’t blame OPs, for undergoing covid test on the next day and for taking 2nd ticket by the complainant paying additional amount for the return journey.

            Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the view that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.  Hence complainant is not entitled to get any relief from OPs. 

            In the result the complaint fails and hence it is dismissed.   No order as to cost.

Exts.

A1-Covid negative certificate

A2&A3-Recept and itinerary

A4-Boarding pass

A5- Test report for SARS Covid 19

A6-Lawyer notice

A7- Reply notice.

Pw1-Complainant

B1-E-mail Regarding Dubai Supreme committee of Crisis and Disaster management regarding protocol for travelers arriving n Dubai and departing from Dubai

B2- True copy of press release from Media office of the Dubai Govt.

B2- True copy of Times of India, Middle East Edition.

 

      Sd/                                                                                     Sd/                                                     Sd/

PRESIDENT                                                                   MEMBER                                            MEMBER

Ravi Susha                                                               Molykutty Mathew                                     Sajeesh K.P

(mnp)

/Forward by order/

 

 

Assistant Registrar

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. RAVI SUSHA]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Moly Kutty Mathew]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sajeesh. K.P]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.