BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION - HYDERABAD
F.A.No.1903/2005 against C.D.No.390/2003 , District Forum-II, Hyderabad .
Between-
1.Dr.Shoukat H.Khan,
S/o. Dr.Sardar Khan,
Age - 55 years, Occ-Doctor,
2. Dr. Ayesha Khan,
W/o.Dr.Shoukat H.Khan,
Age 52 years, Occ-Doctor ,
3. Master Fayzaan H.Khan,
S/o.Dr.Shoukat H.Khan,.
Age 13 years, Occ-Student,
Rep. by his natural mother,
Dr.Ayesha Khan.
(All are R/o. H.No. 8-1-115/21,
Suryanagar , Towli Chowki,
Hyderabad ). ... Appellants/
Complainants
And
1.Air India,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
Air India Building,
Nariman Point,
Mumbai-21.
2. M/s. Masways Travels,
Chappal Road,
Opp.Anmol Residency,
Hyderabad. ...Respondents/
Opp.parties
Counsel for the appellants - M/s.K.Anoop Kumar
Counsel for the respondents - Respondents served .
(none appeared)
CORAM-THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT,
AND
SRI G.BHOOPATHI REDDY, HON’BLE MEMBER
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST,
TWO THOUSAND EIGHT .
Oral Order - (Per Sri G.Bhoopathi Reddy, Hon’ble Member)
----
This is an appeal filed by the appellants/complainants under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986 to set aside the order passed by the District Forum-II, Hyderabad in C.D.No.390/2003 dt. 28.9.2005.
The appellants herein are the complainants before the District Forum . They filed complaint to direct the opp.parties to pay Rs.9,30,000/- and Rs.50,000/- towards the criminal proceedings against the crew members along with interest at the rate of 12 percent p.a. from the date of the complaint till realisation and to award the costs of the complaint.
The case of the complainant is as follows-
The complainants 1 and 2 are husband and wife and they are doctors by profession and complainant no.3 is their son . The complainants are Green
Card holders of US , that they planned to go US and that they have booked tickets through opp.party no.2 being the agent of the opp.party no.1 by paying Rs.1,30,000/- . The complainants on 8.3.2002 at 3.30 have boarded the Hyderabad -Bombay flight . After reaching Bombay the complainants have boarded flight no.129 of Air India vide Bombay-Chicago boarding pass . The complainants had their breakfast and the complainant no.1 asked for beer and the same was provided and he asked for one more beer but the air hostesses said to the steward that quota of complainant no.1 is over and the same was informed to the complainant no.1 . The complainant no.1 has questioned the steward about the reference of the said quota for which no reply was given. Later the air hostesses brought a can of beer and kept on the table of the complainant no.1 in a most rudely manner . The complainant no.1 requested to provide savedal and the airhostesses brought the savedal and gave in a very rude manner . The complainants got upset with this immediately tried to lodge a complaint , but the Crew Manager pleaded not to do so because the career of the airhostesses will be affected When the flight landed at Heathrow the security persons came and took away complainant no.1 and directed the complainants. 2 and 3 to stay in the flight itself and said that he will be sent in another flight and seeing the situation the complainants 2 and 3 requested the crew members to allow them to travel to Chicago . The concerned authorities of opp.party no.1 refused to listen to the request of the complainant and went away by off loading all the complainants at Heathrow . Finally complainants were asked to report at 4.45 a.m. next day so as to catch flight back to India . The complainants went to airport no one was available and after five hours the complainants were asked to come on the next day at 6.45 am and they were sent back to India . Vexed with the attitude of the opp.parties the complainants issued a legal notice to the opp.parties on 19.3.2002 . The said notice was received by both the opp.parties but they did not choose to give reply . Hence the complainants sent another notice on 6.7.2002 for which the opp.party no.1 gave reply on 30.7.2002 making false and frivolous allegations. Hence the complainant approached the District Forum to direct the opp.parties to pay Rs.9,30,000/- and Rs.50,000/- towards the criminal proceedings against the said crew members along with interest at the rate of 12 percent p.a. from the date of the complaint till realization and to award the costs of the complaint.
The opp.party no.2 filed counter denying the allegations made in the complaint. The opp.party stated that the complainant no.1 was absolutely drunken and he was using abusive and unparliamentary language throughout the flight and consumed six cans of beer and the cabin crew tried to pacify him but he was uncontrollable for which the co-passengers protested and warned the complainant and requested to off load the flight . Due to the rude behavior of the complainant no.1 he was deported back to India in the opp.party flight A.1-102 of 9.3.2002 and the complainants 2 and 3 stayed with the complainant no.1 and the HM immigration authorities escorted them to board air India flight to travel to India and the two of the opposite party officials were deputed for traveling along with the 1st complainant’s family on flight A1 109 dt. 10.3.2002 The opp.parties are all the time good in maintaining its international standards. The opposite party issued reply notice for the legal notice issued by the complainants . The complainants have no right to seek for refund of the amounts as they were off loaded passengers because of their own behavior There are no merits in the case of the complainants and prayed to dismiss the complaint with costs.
The complainant filed evidence affidavit and documents Exs.A1 to A7 . The District Forum based on the evidence adduced and pleadings , dismissed the complaint .
Aggrieved by the said order the complainants preferred this appeal contending that the District Forum erroneously held that there was no deficiency of service on behalf of the opp.party no.1 and such conclusion arrived by the court below is contrary to law and evidence on record. The District Forum while passing the orders accepted the oral contention of the opp.party no.1 without looking into the grievance put forth by the complainants . The appellants prayed to set aside the order of the District Forum and allow the appeal.
The point for determination arises in this appeal is whether the order passed by the District Forum is sustainable.-
There is no dispute that the complainants wanted to go USA and the opp.party no.2 who is travel agent of opp.party no.1 has arranged for the travel of the complainants. The complainants have traveled through Air India flight in order to proceed to Chikago . Subsequently the complainants could not travel to Chikago and they were sent back to India. The appellants/complainants contended that the District Forum has not property appreciated the documentary evidence and there was deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties in not allowing them to travel to Chikago. The complainants have filed documentary evidence Exs.A1 to A7 . Ex.A1 is the legal notice issued on behalf of the complainants to the opp.parties dt. 19.3.2002 . In the said legal notice the complainants have taken a specific plea that while they were traveling from Bombay to Chikago in Air India Flight the Air hostesses and crew members harassed them and in mid way of their journey off loading them and they were sent to India and they claimed Rs. Rs.9,30,000/- . Ex.A2 is the reply notice issued by the opp..parties to the complainants . Ex.A3 is another legal notice dt.6.7.2002 issued by the complainants to the opp.parties 1 and 2 . Ex.A4 is the reply given by the Air India to the counsel for the complainants. In the said letter it is stated that Dr. Shaukath Khan while traveling in a flight A1-129 of 08 March 2002 for travel from Mumbai to Chicago via London after consuming six cans of beer he was ordering for two more cans which were served to him and thereafter he started abusing cabin crew Ms. Sheena Grewal , Air Hostess in the most filthiest and unprintable language and also to the Cabin Crew who were around, the passengers seated in that zone protested and warned that Dr.Khan should be off loaded from the flight or otherwise they are not interested in continuing their journey, as they felt in secure with him on board and Capt. Rajan Paul who was the Cammander of flight was informed about the happenings and he alerted the security and traffic officials at London Airport to arrange to off load Dr.Khan from the flight soon after landing. After enquiry he was immediately ordered to be deported back to India . and even after boarding air craft for travel to India Dr.Khan started using foul and unprintable language against the cabin crew and Capt.Khan who was in command of the above flight was informed about it and later the police authorities were also appraised of the situation. . As per this letter itself goes to show that the complainant no.1 has created nuisance in the flight while travelling from Mumbai to Chikago and an enquiry was also conducted by the police. Ex.A5 is another copy of the legal notice issued by complainants to the opp.parties requesting to disclose the names and addresses of the crew members in order to take legal action against them. The District Forum has properly appreciated the documentary evidence and given finding. that the complainant no.1 created violence in the flight and the complainant no.2 was not in a position to control the complainant no.1. and there is no other alternative except off loading the complainant as per the rule and that the complainant no.2 has decided to travel along with her husband to India and on her request only they were sent back to India. The opp.parties have handed over the complainant no.1 to the security person at Heathrow Airport as he has misbehaved with the air hostesses and also air crew and a police complaint was also given against the complainant no.1 and enquiry was conducted against him and thereafter in pursuance of the enquiry the complainants were sent back to India on their the request only. The District Forum has properly discussed the documentary evidence and given finding . There was no deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties. There are no reasonable grounds to interfere with the order of the District Forum.
In the result appeal is dismissed. In the circumstances without costs.
PRESIDENT MALE MEMBER
Dt. 8.8.2008
