KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REVISION 12/2011
ORDER DATED 5.4.2011
PRESENT
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT
SHRI.S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR -- MEMBER
1. AIR ASIA,
Nedumbassery International Airport,
Nedumbassery, Ernakulam,
Reptd. by its Manager.
2. AIR ASIA
Regd. Office at LCC Terminal, -- REV.PETITIONER
Jalan, KLIA S3, Kulalampur
International Airport, reptd. by its
Manager, Air Asia, Nedumbassery
Ernakulam.
(By Adv. G.K.Sudheer)
Vs.
1. AJESH BABU S/o balakrishnan,
Chandresh Nilayam, Puthiyakavu,
Thripunnithura, Ernakulam.
2. Galaxy Tours and Travels -- OPP.PARTIES
KKM Complex, Near Atlantis Railway Gate.
Kizhavana Road, Panampally Nagar,
Kochin 36 reptd. by its Manager.
(O.P.1 by Adv.Jehfer Sadhiq)
ORDER
SHRI.JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT
The revision petitioners are the opposite parties in CC.112/10 in the file of CDRF, Ernakulam. The contention raised by the opposite parties/revision petitioners regarding territorial jurisdiction was rejected by the Forum.
2. The matter is with respect to the air tickets purchased from the third opposite party at Kochi. The air tickets are of the first and second opposite parties. The dispute is with respect to the difficulties faced by the complainant, when he wanted to return from Jakarta via Kulalampur to Kochi. The tickets were journey from Kochi to Kulalampur and Kulalampur to Jakarta and return by the same route. It is the case of the complainant that he had preponed the journey for returning from Jakarta. But he was not allowed to travel through the air line of the opposite parties on the ground that by the time, the immigration rules of Malaysia wherein Kulalampur is situated has been changed. He had to purchase the air ticket on a higher rate of another airline.
3. At this point, the Forum was concerned only with respect to the territorial jurisdiction. It has to be noted that all the air tickets for onward travel and return is that of opposite parties 1 and 2/M/s Air asia. The counsel for the appellant has relied on the decision in Sonic Surgical Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd; Civil Appeal No.1560/04 of the Supreme Court of India, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction. We find that the fact situation in the above cited decision is different from that of the instant case. In the above decision, the complaint was filed in Chandigarh only on the ground that the branch office of the opposite parties is situated at Chandigarh. Everything else has taken place at Ambala. The policy was availed at Ambala. The go-down involved was situated at Ambala and the fire has taken place at Ambala. In the above fact situation the Supreme Court has held that the branch office in the amended Section 17 (2) of the C.P. Act would mean a branch office were the cause of action has arisen. The above observation of the Supreme Court has to be read in the light of fact situation in the above case. We find that in the instant case the situation is different as the complainant has purchased the air ticket at Kochi and the destination is also at Kochin. In the circumstances, we find that the contention that the CDRF at Cochi is not having the territorial jurisdiction cannot be sustained.
4. In the circumstances, we find that there is no scope for admitting the RP filed. The same is dismissed in limine .
Office will forward the copy of this order to the Forum.
JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU -- PRESIDENT
S.CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR -- MEMBER