Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/193/2024

RAJESH CHOPRA - Complainant(s)

Versus

AIR INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

MANDEEP SINGH RAWAT

20 Nov 2024

ORDER

  STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                                    U.T., CHANDIGARH (Additional Bench)

 

 

Appeal No.	:	193 of 2024
Date of Institution	:	16.05.2024
Date of Decision	:	20.11.2024

 

1.  Rajesh Chopra S/o Sh. S.K. Chopra S/o Sh.  S. K. Chopra
2. Gamini Chopra W/o Rajesh Chopra

          Both residents of House No.1006, Sector 43 B, Chandigarh.

                                                                                             ... Appellants

                                                  Versus

          M/s Air India Ltd. SCO 162-164, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh through its authorized representative/ Director/MD

                    2nd Address:-

          SCO No.113, Airlines House, Gurudwara Rakab Ganj Road, Parliament Street, Behind All India Radio Delhi.

                                                                ..... Respondent

                

          BEFORE:       MRS. PADMA PANDEY              PRESIDING MEMBER

                                 MR.PREETINDER SINGH          MEMBER

 

            Argued by:      Sh. Mandeep Singh Rawat, Advocate for the appellants.

Respondent  already ex-parte vide order dated 06.08.2024.

 

 

 

 PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER

 

This appeal is directed against the order dated 02.02.2024, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as “the Ld. Lower Commission”), vide which, it partly allowed the Consumer Complaint bearing no. 270 of 2023 in the following terms:-

“ 4.  In light of the aforesaid discussion the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is hereby allowed and OP is directed as under:-

1.          to pay an amount of ₹50,000/- to the complainants as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to them;
2.          to pay ₹10,000/- to the complainants as costs of litigation.

                      5.    This order be complied with by the OP within 45  days from the  date of receipt of its certified copy, falling which, it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr. No, (i) above, with  interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till                                   realization apart from compliance of direction at Sr. No. (ii) above.”

 

2.                 For the convenience, the parties are being referred to, in the instant Appeal, as position held in Consumer Complaint before the Ld. District Commission.
3.                 Before the Ld. District Commission, it was the case of the complainants, that they booked  two air tickets on 12.1.2023 from New York  John F Kennedy INTL Terminal 4 to Delhi Indira Gandhi INTL Terminal 3 having flight No.A1102 Class D, Seat 10E departure on 20.1.2023 and arrival on 21.1.2023.  The complainants had paid a total amount of Rs.8,24,964/- for both the air tickets. It was averred that the complainants who were senior citizen and even the complainant No 1 is brain stroke patient and handicapped as such they booked business class tickets considering that they could travel comfortably without any hassle. Complainant No.1 had specifically gone to America to undergo physiotherapy sessions but while travelling with the subject flight, the complainants had to forcibly sit on broken seats, having support of stools in front portion to their feet for long continuous 14 hours journey.  Even the complainants could not recline their seats to a lie down on a flat bed for an overnight 14 hours long journey which resulted into excessive swelling and pain of feet of complainant No.1. As such, the complainants through their son raised the concern vide mail dated 23.1.2023, which was replied by the OPs but with no result except that the OPs had regretted the inconvenience caused to the complainants. Eventually, the complainants sent legal notice through registered post which was replied by the OPs in which it has been alleged by the OPs that the complainant should have been and vigilant with respect of the seats they choose for a 14 hours long  journey. Hence the aforesaid Consumer Complaint was filed before the Ld. District Commission, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties.
4.                 The OP did not appear to contest the case and preferred to proceed against ex-parte before the learned District Commission.
5.                 On appraisal of the pleadings of the parties and the evidence adduced on the record, Ld. District Commission partly allowed the Consumer Complaint of the complainant as noticed in the opening para of this order.
6.                 Aggrieved against the aforesaid order passed by the Ld. District Commission, the instant Appeal has been filed by the Appellants/complainants.
7.                 Pertinently, during the present proceedings also, despite due service, the Respondent failed to appear, therefore it was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 06.08.2024.
8.                 We have heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellants and have gone through the evidence and record of the case with utmost care.
9.                 The core question that falls for consideration before us is as to whether the Ld. District Commission has rightly passed the impugned order by appreciating the entire material placed before it.
10.            After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the contentions raised and material on record, we are of the considered opinion, that the instant Appeal is liable to be dismissed for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter.
11.           It is observed from the records of the District Commission that due care has been taken for paying compensation to the complainant/appellant by partly allowing the complaint alongwith litigation charges since the learned District Commission has alleged deficiency on the part of the respondent i.e. Air India Ltd. SCO 162-164, Sector 34-A Chandigarh, based on the allegations made by the appellants supported by duly filed affidavit where in it was admitted that the appellants/complainant had suffered physical and mental agony because of defective seats during the air journey. The present appeal is for enhancement of compensation and litigation charges. To our mind, it appears that the appellants/complainants have been adequately compensated and it is to be borne in mind that the Consumer Foras are not for enriching oneself but only to get the reasonable compensation and other expenses in case of deficiency in services by the Opposite Party. Accordingly, the order passed by the learned District Commission does not require any interference from this Commission and the appeal accordingly, stands dismissed.
12.                     Keeping in view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that the impugned order passed by the Ld. District Commission, partly allowing the consumer Complaint ordering refund of the amount of compensation and litigation expenses, is based on the correct appreciation of evidence and law on the point, does not suffer from any illegality, and do not need interference of this Commission.  Resultantly, the appeal being bereft of merit is accordingly dismissed and the order of the Ld. District Commission is upheld.
13.                    All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of, accordingly.
14.                     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, forthwith.
15.                    The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion and the District Commission be sent back immediately.

 

Pronounced

20^th Nov, 2024

Sd/-                                                                                                                          [PADMA PANDEY]

PRESIDING MEMBER

Sd/- [PREETINDER SINGH]

MEMBER

‘Tanvi’