By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,

1. This complaint is preferred by power of attorney holder of the complainant, Swapna Muhammdeli, who had booked air tickets with opposite party from Damam for her travel from Dammam to Calicut and back to Dammam. At the time of issuance the tickets were not confirmed. After reaching India the power of attorney holder herein went to the office of opposite party to confirm the tickets which were issued in favour of complainant and her two children who were aged 1 year and 6 years and the third child who was only three months old. Opposite party replied that no seats were available, and also informed that if complainant paid Rs.2,805/- per person business class seat could be provided. Accordingly he paid a total of Rs.8,415/- and the tickets for their travel on 24-8-2006 from Calicut to Dammam was confirmed. On the scheduled day when they reached Air Port to get the boarding passes did they realize that all three have been allotted general seat and not business class seat. Moreover their seats including the seat of the three month old baby was provided at different places in the economy class. Though the complainant reported her inconvenience to opposite party no steps were taken to redress her grievance. Complainant alleges that the failure on the part of opposite party to give business class seat after collecting Rs.2,805/- each in excess and also the act of opposite party in not providing adjacent seats tot he mother and children amounts to deficiency in service. Hence the complaint.

2. Opposite party filed version admitting that complainant and her children travelled from Dammam to Calicut and that they held economy class return tickets. It is submitted that the amount collected was not the difference in fare between Economy Class and Business Class. That since complainant was in possession of economy class tickets in a lower fare designator and seats were not available in this lower fare category on the said date as per the passengers choice seats were offered in a higher fare designator of the same economy class which in this case was B. That seats are broadly divided into First Class, Executive Class and Economy Class. These are again divided into subclasses by Reservation Booking Designators (RBD) which have various levels of fares complied by the Revenue Management Department of Air India, Under this system of RBD., the airline nests certain numbers of seats in each class of travel based on various sales parameters, such as, Area of sales, (sales within India/Sales from abroad), seasonal demands etc. The RBD of First Class is F & A, the RBD of Executive class is J, C or D and the RBD of Economy class is W, Y, B, H, K, L, M, V, G & V. Each RBD is different in the same aircraft in the same class even though passenger might have paid different fares based on the time at which ticket was purchased and area from where ticket was purchased.

3. A ticket which is originally issued in lower class like V, M, or L may subsequently be changed to another higher class on the option of the passenger while confirming reservation if no seats are available in the lower fare class. Each higher RBD carries additional charge and passenger has to pay this amount if he or she wishes to travel on a particular date of his or her choice. Passengers are informed about this system and once the passenger agrees to pay the differences, tickets are issued with additional fare details. In the present case, the complainant misunderstood B class as Business class when actually the confirmation of the ticket held in Economy class was done in the same class with different RBD which was B. That there is no deficiency in service and opposite party is not liable to refund the extra amount of Rs.8,415/- collected for confirmation in a higher value class ticket. That complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4. Evidence consists of the affidavit filed by Power of Attorney holder of complainant and exts.exts.A1 to A11 marked for complainant. Opposite party filed counter affidavit and Ext.B1 marked for opposite party.

5. Points for consideration:-

(i) Whether opposite party is deficient in service.

(ii) If so reliefs and costs.

6. Point (i) & (ii):-

The grievance of the complainant is two fold (i) That though at the time of confirming the tickets opposite party collected Rs.8, 415/- in addition and informed that tickets are issued in business class complainant was not allotted seat in business class and had to travel in economy class. (ii) That complainant who was a lady and travelling along with three kids out of which one kid was an infant aged only three months old were allotted seats in different parts and their request for providing seats adjacent was not heeded to by opposite party.

7. In the version as well as in the counter affidavit filed, opposite party has explained in detail that at the time of confirmation the additional charges was collected for 'B' class ticket in Economy class itself and that complainant was not issued ticket in Business class. The details of the various classes and the manner of declaring the RBD is also stated by opposite party. Along with an additional counter affidavit opposite party has produced Ext.B1 which is the copy of the computer print out titled as Fare class Explanation generated from the Air India Reservation System. This document sufficiently proves the contention of opposite party that the tickets issued were B class tickets in Economy class and that additional charges were collected for this class which is of higher fare in RBD or which is an Economy Unrestricted Fare ticket. We can reasonably infer that the complainant had mistakenly understood the 'B' Class noted in the tickets to be Business Class tickets. It is also affirmed by opposite party that three Main classes are First Class, Executive Class and Economy class. That reservation of First Class are F and C classes. In Executive Class it is J, C or D. The contention of opposite party supported by Ext.B1 is believable and acceptable. For these reasons we are unable to accept the contention of the complainant that she purchased business class tickets and was denied seat in this class.

8. The second grievance of the complainant is that she was travelling with three kids out out of which one was an infant aged only three months and the other children were aged only 8 and six years. That even after informing this at the time of issuing boarding passes opposite parties allotted seats to all of them in different places creating much hardships and mental strain to her. Her requests to opposite party to allot adjacent seats for herself and kids was not heeded by opposite party at all. These allegations are not specifically denied by opposite party in their version or affidavit. Opposite party has offered no explanation for not allotting adjacent seats to a mother having an infant baby and two tiny tots. These facts stated by complainant stand undisputed. Definitely it is difficult for a mother during air travel to separate from her young ones who need constant attention. A woman who travels alone with children that too, when her hand is full time occupied with an infant, should be given dignified and sensitive consideration. Opposite party ought to have rendered service which is qualitative and satisfying to the consumers. Any imperfection in such service definitely amounts to deficiency in service. On this account we find opposite party deficient in service. Taking into consideration the inconveniences and mental strain undergone by her due to the allotment of seats in a scattered manner we hold that an amount of Rs.6,000/- as compensation together with costs of Rs.1,000/- would not only be sufficient remedy to the complainant but will also serve as a message to opposite party to improve their quality of service and be more consumer sensitive and consumer friendly.

9. In the result, we allow this complaint and order opposite party to pay Rs.6,000/- (Rupees Six thousand only) as compensation to complainant together with costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Dated this 24th day of January, 2009.

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER

APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A11

Ext.A1 : Passenger ticket and baggage check by Air India from Dammam

Calicut-Dammam(44266663412 3)

Ext.A2 : Passenger ticket and baggage check (4426663414 5)

Ext.A3 : Passenger ticket and baggage check(4426663413 4)

Ext.A4 : Passenger ticket and baggage check(5165383179 5)

Ext.A5 : Passenger ticket and baggage check(5165383177 3)

Ext.A6 : Passenger ticket and baggage check(5165383178 4 )

Ext.A7 : Passenger ticket and baggage check(2631394538 3)

Ext.A8 : Boarding Pass of complainant.

Ext.A9 : Boarding Pass of Afnan Mohammed

Ext.A10 : Boarding Pass of Ashin K.C. MIS

Ext.A11 : Boarding Pass of Hananmuhammeda

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil

Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Ext.B1

Ext.B1 : Computer print out titled Fare Class Explanation

Sd/-

C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT

Sd/-

MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-

MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER