DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.

Case No.304/2014

Sh. Dev Raj                                                          (Senior Citizen

C- 212, Panchvati Apartments, F- Block,          71 years old)
Vikas Puri, New Delhi-11 0018                                 ….Complainant

Versus

The Manager, Air India -Reservation 
Safdarjung Airport,

New Delhi-11 0003                                        …...Opposite Party

               Date of Institution             :    05.08.2014

Date of Order            :   29.04.2017

Coram:

Sh. N.K. Goel, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

ORDER

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant was a staff of Air India (AI)/OP. According to the complainant, the staff members and their families are entitled for (i) Free tickets for travel on International and Domestic (within India) sectors on AI's Network/ Routes AND (ii) Concessional Air Tickets which are called ZED (Zonal Employees' Discounted) Tickets on some other International Airlines for travel on their sectors/routes on payment of about 25% of fares and airport taxes, and taxes of the concerned Governments. During the month of December 2013 the complainant alongwith his wife had to travel to Belfast (North Ireland-UK) to visit their daughter and son-in-law. He applied to AI's HRD (Human Resources Department) IGI Airport, New Delhi to formally issue an Authority Letter asking AI's Ticketing Office to issue two free Air Tickets for them (Dev Raj) and his wife (Mrs. Kamlesh Kumari) for travel Delhi-London-Delhi on AI. AI's HRD issued an authority letter. On the said authority letter, AI's ticketing office issued him two E-tickets (No. 0982108350849 for his wife Kamlesh Kumari and No. 0982108350854 for him Raj/Dev Mr. It is stated that there is a procedure/ rule that all airlines worldwide print/write the passenger's last name/First name, followed by Mr. or Mrs.) As their destination was Belfast (ahead of London), and they had to take British Airways flight from London to Belfast (as AI doesn't go to Belfast), he made a separate application to the Duty officer (Reservations ticketing) to issue him two ZED tickets for travel London - Belfast - London on British Airways (as per ZED tickets agreement between Airlines, on payment of about 25% fare price and government/airport taxes). The duty officer (Reservations ticketing) approved his application and asked one lady staff to issue two ZED tickets for travel on British Airways flight. The lady staff checked their passports/documents and issued two ZED tickets (Nos. 0982108302411 and 412) but she printed names as DEVRAJ/MR and KAMLESHKUMARI/MRS. He pointed out to the said staff to print their names correctly as RAJ/DEV Mr. and KUMARI/KAMLESH Mrs. (as per established airlines reservation procedure and print the "Last name / First name" and then follow it with Mr or Mrs.) but the said staff declined and stated that the OP issued tickets as per the names appearing on passports only. He alongwith his wife first travelled from Delhi to London on Air India staff Tickets on flight AI-115 on 18.12.2013 which got delayed for about four hours and arrived at LHR (London Heathrow) airport terminal 4 at about 14.40 hrs. (local UK Time). Then after immigration/custom clearance they rushed to Terminal 1 to take BA flight for Belfast. At Terminal 1, they contacted BA Passenger Relations Counter (PRC) to get their names listed for BA flight, London to Belfast. The BA staff at PRC told him that their system/computer is not accepting the names as were printed on the ZED tickets as the system was looking for inputs in the form of Last Name /First Name then Mr. or Mrs. in the lATA format. The OP staff in Delhi had made tickets by the names DEVRAJ/Mr. and KAMLESHKUMARI/Mrs., whereas it should have been printed as RAJ/DEV Mr. and KUMARI/KAMLESH Mrs., Due to this error, the British Airways refused to accept the tickets at London Heathrow as issued by Air India. The BA staff further advised him to furnish/produce fresh tickets issued with correct names as per established reservation procedure laid down by lATA. They were stranded in a foreign country, at a Non-AI location terminal 1 of LHR airport and at an odd time (about 17.30 local time) when even all offices were closed and they had insufficient funds to buy new tickets, they were unable to contact anyone in AI's London Office and there was only Last Flight of BA and its Departure time was 19.00 hrs. He and his wife (both senior citizen aged 67 and 60 respectively) were physically exhausted and utterly helpless. It was winter /Christmas season and they had no place to go/stay even in a low cost London hotel for night. He called his daughter and son-in-law in Belfast.  His son-in-law had to purchase two online one way tickets for their travel London-Belfast. Accordingly paid GBP 422.60 through credit card. This made them highly depressed and made their trip extremely painful. After a couple of weeks after reaching Belfast, he sent an email/letter to the Reservation Manager of OP telling about the serious mistake done by its ticketing staff while issuing ZED tickets in Delhi and also explained about the trouble and financial loss they suffered due to OP’s negligence. Further, he requested Air India to issue fresh/correct ZED tickets for their return travel (Belfast to London on BA). Next day, he got reply from the Manager of OP in which it was stated that “"it is really unfortunate that you had hard time in Belfast airport. In order for us to correct the names I would request you to forward your passport copies and in the meantime also try listing yourself on the return from Belfast to London'". In this short reply OP didn't regret for its grave mistake  and consequent troubles faced by the complainant. As desired by OP, he sent copies of their passports (although the same had already been shown at the time of issuance of tickets in Delhi). Accordingly OP emailed two fresh tickets with correct names written as KUMARI/KAMLESH Mrs. and RAJ/DEV Mr. Then he tried to get their names listed for return BA flight (Belfast to London), but there was no BA office in Belfast, city nor at Belfast airport, so he was unable to get their names listed. (Staffs' names are listed only at London Airport at passenger/staff relations counter PRC). Hence they were again unable to use/avail ZED tickets for travel (Belfast - London) and had to return home in Belfast despite the facts that seats were available on the flight. Again, they had no other option except to buy fresh tickets for their travel Belfast to London.  His son-in-law (on 16.03.2014) made online booking and bought two online tickets Nos. 1258509060141- for him & 1258509060142- for his wife for travel on 22.03.2014 for GBP 56.50 x 2 = GBP 113.00 (equivalent to Rs. 11,300) for two tickets. Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complaint has been filed for issuing directions to the OP to pay:-

“1.     Cost of Two wrong ZED Tickets London- Belfast

issued by A.I. Delhi                                     Rs.18602/-

2.       Cost of Two London-Belfast Ticket UK P 422.60

equivalent to                                               Rs.42260/-

3.      Cost of Two Belfast-London Tickets UK P 113.00

          equivalent to                                              Rs.11,300/-

4.      Taxi rent Resi/Apt/Resi @ GPB each side UK 11.00

          equivalent to                                              Rs.2,200/-

5.      Compensation for mental harassment/pain to both

          of us (me and my wife) UK P. 1,000.00

          equivalent to                                              Rs.2,00,000/-

6.      Cost/Expenses for litigation in

Delhi/India                                                Rs.20,000/-

                                                Total        Rs.2,94,362/-

        7.      With interest @ 18% P.A. (w.e.f. 18-12-2013) to be

added to the above amount”

OP in the written statement has inter-alia stated that the complainant has not come before this Forum with clean hands; that the complainant has deliberately failed to make British Airways as a party. It is stated that all passengers travelling on any airline need to mandatorily carry their passport with them which contains their essential information such as name, address, date of birth, spouse name, etc. The passport is always checked by the concerned Airline(s) to ensure authenticity of the person travelling on the ticket of the airline. The passport of the complainant and his wife do not have any name written under the space provided for the heading “surname”.  It is submitted that that all the airlines whether domestic or internal carriers work on a computerized  reservation system which is known as CRS. The CRS system works on four platforms which are called Amedeus, Gallelio, Saber and Inter Globe. Different airlines can choose either of the platform for their CRS system. In all the CRS system  the methodology of booking a ticket is the same wherein the surname comes first. This is because,  it makes it clear  for the airlines to track the information of the passengers by searching the surname but in this case the complainant and his wife did not have the surname, the given name automatically become the surname on the basis of which the tickets were issued  to them.  The tickets were valid from London to Belfast. They boarded the flight AI 115 from New Delhi to London. The British Airways simply had to put the name as it appear on the ticket of the complainant on their CRS  which would have accepted the same and the complainant would have been able to travel into their onward journey. It is submitted that the British Airways does not act in any manner as an agent and/or partner of the OP. Therefore, if the complainant was  denied boarding by the British Airways inspite of the fact that the ticket were issued by the OP which were in accordance with the information in the passport therefore OP cannot be held liable for the same.  It is pleaded as under page:-

“ It is submitted that the Opposite Party did not owe any apology to the complainant since the tickets issued by it were completely valid. However, in order to facilitate the complainant,  the opposite party re-issued the tickets from Belfast to London and asked the complainant to get the same listed.  It is submitted that British Airways not having an office in Belfast is not the responsibility of the Opposite Party and the same cannot be held liable. The correct party to hold liable (if at all) is British Airways, who the complainant has not, for obvious reasons, made a party to this instant complaint.

……It is submitted that the complainant never intended to travel back from Belfast to London on the date on which the tickets were issued and is making up a story to cover up its act. It is brought to this Ld. Forum’s notice that the fresh ticket as was issued by the Opposite Party for the Complainant and his wife were for a journey intended to travel on 25.01.2014 from Belfast to London. However, the ticket bought by the son-in-law of the complainant for Belfast to London sector was for 22.03.2014, almost two months later. The complainant be put to strict proof on why it changed its travel plan. Because of the fact that the complainant wanted to travel on a later date than on the date of the ticket issued, the complainant has made up his whole story only to unjustly enrich himself.

……It is submitted that the complainant has not suffered any mental harassment and or pain and or financial loss. It is submitted that the complainant being a former employee of the Opposite Party has in any event travelled at a fraction of a cost to an international destination, for which passengers pay a lot of fee. The Opposite Party has absorbed all costs of the Complainant despite it being in poor financial health itself. It goes against the basic mortality of the Complainant who has been a member of the Opposite Party to bring such a frivolous case against the Opposite Party, on whose basis the complainant has been able to travel along with his family members and avail a host of other benefits during his tenure with the Opposite Party and even thereafter.”

OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

Complainant has filed a rejoinder and reiterated the averments made in the complaint.

Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence. On the other hand, affidavit of Ms. Sangeeta Baba, Manager (Commercial) has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.

Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.

We have heard the arguments on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the file very carefully.

It is not in dispute that the complainant had booked the tickets from Delhi to London and London to Belfast through the OP. The OP issued the tickets as per the information given in the passports provided by the complainant. We mark the copies of the passports as Annexure-A (Colly). The OP issued fresh tickets for 25.01.2014 from Belfast to London by changing name as advised by the complainant (we mark the copy of the document as Annexure-B for the purposes of identification). The complainant had not travelled back from Belfast to London on the date when the tickets were issued by the OP i.e. 25.01.14. The complainant travelled from Belfast to London on 22.03.14 almost two months later.  The complainant neither informed the OP that he  will not travel on 25.01.14 nor filed any request to the OP to postpone the tickets from 25.01.14 to 22.03.14. It clearly shows that the complainant was not interested to travel on 25.01.14.  Hence, OP cannot be put at blame for causing financial loss to the complainant on that account. Hence, the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the OP as the OP had already issued the tickets in the changed names as advised the complainant.  Accordingly, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on  29.04.17.