| Final Order / Judgement | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM CACHAR :: SILCHAR Con. Case No. 16 of 2011 Mr. P.S. Karthikeyan Nair, ……………..…………………… Complainant. -V/S- Airport Authority of India, Netaji Subash Chandra Bose international Airports Dum Dum, Kolkata-700052, West Bengal ……………………… O.P. Present: - Sri Bishnu Debnath, President, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Shri Kamal Kumar Sarda, Member, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Appeared :- Sri A. Biswas, Advocate for the complainant. Sri Sahajan Barbhuiya, Advocate for the O.P. Date of Evidence……………………….. 19-12-2011, 06-02-2012 Date of written argument……………… 23-03-2017, 05-08-2017 Date of oral argument………………….. 04-09-2017, 27-11-2017 Date of judgment………………………. 26-12-2017 JUDGMENT AND ORDER Sri Bishnu Debnath, - This case has been brought by husband of the victim Mrs. Kamala Nair under the provision of Consumer protection Act. 1986 against the Airport Authority of India for award of compensation because his wife sustained fracture both legs at the exit gate of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Interantional Airports Dum Dum, Kolkata during the time of boarding to Aircraft due to low Level of the floor. It is further stated that on 12/08/2009 both the Complainant and his wife Mrs. Kamala Nair proceeded to board in the Flight No. IC-253 at Dum Dum Airport for Silchar but she could not board the Aircraft due to the above accident. Accordingly, she was rushed to AMRI Hospital, Dhakeria, Kolkata and admitted and during treatment her right leg was operated and left leg was plastered.
- Notice issued to O.P. The O.P. submitted W/S. In the W/S stated inter alia that the allegation is false and the Complainant has no locus-standee to institute the case. The O.P. also stated that this District Forum has no Juristic to try this case. Of course, it is admitted that the Complainant and his wife purchased Air ticket of Indian Airline to travel from Kolkata to Silchar on 12/08/2009 and due to aforesaid accident she sustained injury and hospitalized. However, the O.P. in the W/S stated that allegation regarding disservice or low level of floor at the exit gate is false.
- During hearing the complainant deposed as PW-1 and exhibited some documents including Air tickets, copies of Medical prescription, copies of X-ray report etc. The O.P. also examined V.P. Arya, the Asst. General Manager (law) Airport Authority of India, NSCBI, Airport, Kolkata. After closing evidence both sides counsels submitted written argument.
- Heard oral argument of both sides’ counsels. Perused evidence and written argument.
- In the case it is admitted fact that wife of the Complainant sustained fracture both legs while proceeding for boarding in the Aircraft on 12/08/2009. It is also admitted fact that incidence was occurred at Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Inter National Airport Dum Dum, Kolkata. But the case has been brought by husband of the victim for the reasons best known to him. Hence, the O.P raised objection.
- We have heard both sides’ counsels on that point and perused other material. As per the provision of section 2(1) (b) of the Consumer Protection Act. 1986, following person are Complainant:-
- A Consumer or
- Any voluntary Consumer association registered under the companies Act.1956 or under any other law for the time being in force or
- The Central Government or any State Government or
- One or more Consumer, where there are numerous Consumer having the same interest
- In case of death of a consumer, his legal heir or representative who or which makes a complaint.
- Thus, in this case the consumer is entitled to bring the case under the Consumer Protection Act,1986 on the legal heir or representative if the consumer is dead. However, on careful perusal of evidence on record I have concluded that the victim Mrs. Kamala Nair is alive but the case brought by her husband without assigning the reasons. Anyhow, in view of Section 2(1) (d)(II) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 consumer means any person who avail of any service for consideration which includes any beneficiary of such service. Therefore, in the instant case, the complainant deposed that he purchased Air Ticket for his wife and for him. So, his wife is beneficiary of such service and as such the Complainant is a not only a consumer but his wife being beneficiary is also a consumer. Therefore, in our considered view, the complainant has locus-standee to bring this case for compensation.
- So far as, territorial jurisdiction is concern, it is admitted fact that the Airport Authority of India is a juristic person and the business of that Airport Authority is spread all over India. Moreover, the complainant was intended to travel from Kolkata to Silchar and Silchar Airport Authority is presumed to be the part of Airport Authority of India. Hence, this District Forum has jurisdiction to depose the complaint.
- But in this case though the incidence has been admitted by the O.P but denied that the allegation for incidence due to low level of the floor of the Airport. The complainant brought the allegation that accident was occurred due to abruptly low level of the floor at the exit gate of the Airport. But how much low the level of the floor is not established. Moreover, no material is supplied to determine the international slandered of the level of floor. Moreover, no material is supplied to establish any other facts of similar incidence occurred at the same Airport.
- Hence, I do not find any negligence or disservice on the part of the O.P in respect of aforesaid incidence. So, there is no scope to grant any relief to the complainant. As such, this case is dismissed on contest without any cost. Supply free certified copy of judgment to the parties. Given under hand and seal of this District Forum on this the 26th day of December, 2017.
| |
