Ex-P A R T E O R D E R
PER SHRI. S.B.DHUMAL - HON’BLE PRESIDENT :
1) In brief consumer dispute is as under –
That the Complainant was a student studying in New York till 2010. Opposite Party No.2 is the travel agent of Opposite Party No.1- British Airways. It is the case of the Complainant that he had purchased at Mumbai Air Tickets from Opposite Party No.2 of the air flight of Opposite Party No.1 for the journey from Mumbai to New York via London and back, by paying Rs.6,000/-. Alongwith complaint, the Complainant has annexed copy of e-ticket at Exh.‘A’. It is submitted that while returning from New York to Mumbai via London on the flight of Opposite Party No.1 on 24/06/2010 by Flight BA 114 departing JFK Airport, New York at London there was connecting Flight BA 199 from London to Mumbai on 25/06/2010 at 11.10 a.m. The Complainant reached at New York and he was checked in for the flight to Mumbai via London and issued necessary boarding pass. Schedule departure time of the said flight was 9.55 p.m. However, the flight was delayed. The Complainant being concerned of possibility of missing the connecting flight inquired with the flight staff of Opposite Party No.1, but he was assured that the flight would make up time and he would get connected flight. Due to the delay of Flight BA 114 departing from JFK Airport, the Complainant missed connecting flight at London, as there was delay of 2 hours in reaching of said flight at London Airport. Next flight was after 10 hours. The Complainant being student had no local money. The Complainant was advised to report at the Customer Care Desk of Opposite Party No.1 at London Airport. The staff at Customer Care Desk was rude and unhelpful and informed the Complainant that he was rebooked for his travel to Mumbai at night on Flight BA 199, departing at 21.45 p.m. The Complainant was to wait for about 10 hours at the airport so he made request for accommodation but it was refused. After much argument Opposite Party No.1 issued a voucher of meager amount of 10 GB Pounds i.e. approximately Rs.700 to the Complainant. As per the Complainant 10 GB Pounds would only fetch him at the most two bottles of water or two cups of coffee at London Airport. It was not possible to purchase meal with meager sum of 10 GB Pounds. The Complainant was totally blank. The Complainant was not allowed to make telephone call to his parents. For which is Complainant purchased phone card at London Airport and contacted his father and informed the situation. The Complainant’s father from Mumbai advised the Complainant to go to his friend’s home in Central London. Then the Complainant went to the house of his father’s friend where he barrowed money from father’s friend to pay taxi charges and other expenses. He had borrowed GB Pounds 125 i.e. approximately Rs.8,000/- for taxi fair, purchase of phone card and meal, etc.
2) It is submitted by the Complainant that staff of Opposite Party No.1 at London Airport was not co-operative and refused accommodation. No meal was provided to him. The Complainant had to barrow Rs.8,000/- to incur necessary expenses. After reaching at Mumbai the Complainant wrote a letter to the Opposite Party No.1 about the event and requested to reimburse the actual expenses but Opposite Party No.1 refused to reimburse the amounts which were actually incurred by the Complainant. According to the Complainant, due to deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party No.1 he has suffered mental agony, inconvenience and harassment and therefore, he has filed this complaint. The Complainant has prayed to direct Opposite Party No.1 to pay sum of Rs.8,000/- to the Complainant towards bonafide expenses incurred by the Complainant at London. He has prayed for interest on aforesaid amount of Rs.8,000/-. The Complainant has claimed compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- from Opposite Party No.1 for mental agony and harassment and Rs.12,000/- towards additional charges paid for change in date of travel. He has also prayed for Rs.25,000/- towards cost of this proceeding.
3) Alongwith complaint, the Complainant has produced copies of documents at Exh.‘A’ to ‘C’ and his affidavit in support of the complaint.
4) Opposite Party No.1 & 2 have not appeared before this Forum. Hence, ex-parte order passed against the Opposite Party No.1 & 2 on 30/11/2010.
5) The Complainant has filed affidavit of evidence and alongwith affidavit of evidence he produced xerox copy of e-ticket for Mumbai to New York via London and back to Mumbai journey by air flight of Opposite Party No.1, copy of letter dtd.19/07/2010 received from Opposite Party No.1, etc. The Complainant has also filed written argument. Heard Ld.Advocate Mr. Gokalgandhi for the Complainant
6) It is case of the Complainant that he was studying in New York till June, 2010. Opposite Party No.2 is a travel agent Opposite Party No.1. For journey from Mumbai to New York via London and back on flight of Opposite Party No.1, he purchased e-ticket by making payment of Rs.60,000/- to Opposite Party No.2. He has produced copy of e-tickets at Exh.‘A’. According to the Complainant, while returning back to Mumbai from New York via London, on 24/06/2010 he went to JFK International Airport, New York before schedule time. He was checked in at New York Airport and Opposite Party No.1 issued boarding pass. Departure of the Opposite Party No.1’s flight BA 114 from New York was at 9.55 a.m. However, flight was delayed for about 2 hours. When he reached at London, connecting flight had already left London Airport. Then he went to the Consumer Care Desk of Opposite Party at London Airport. The staff at airport behaved rudely with the Complainant. Next connecting flight was after 10 hours. Opposite Party did not provide accommodation, phone call facility and meal to him. After his repeated requests Opposite Party No.1 gave only 10 GB Pounds i.e. approximately 700 rupees to the Complainant. At London Airport the Complainant could not purchase meal for himself at 10 GB Pounds. He was not allowed to make telephone calls to his parents. So he was constrained to purchase phone card and contacted his father on telephone. As per advice of his father he went to the home of his father’s friend, situated at Central London by a taxi. He borrowed Rs.8,000/- from his father’s friend for necessary expenses such as, meal, phone card and taxi fair, etc. The Complainant has filed affidavit in support averment made in the complaint.
7) The Complainant has produced copy of letter dtd.19/07/2010 received from British Airways. The contends of letter are as under –
“Dear Mr. Philip,
I am so sorry you missed your connecting flight from London Heathrow due to the late arrival of your incoming flight. I can understand how frustrating it must have been for you. Please accept my sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused.
We recognized that it is essential for us to improve our current performance on punctuality. In fact our chief executive, Willie Walsh, has made it one of British Airways’ key priorities. His teams are working closely with every department that has a bearing on punctuality. They have put measures in place to make sure delays are kept to an absolute minimum, so we can get customers on their way as soon as possible and improve our punctuality record.”
Opposite Party No.1 in the aforesaid letter have clearly admitted that as their flight coming from New York arrived at London late and therefore, the Complainant missed connecting flight. It appears from the evidence that next flight was after 10 hours. Opposite Party did not make any provision for accommodation, mill, etc for the Complainant. The Complainant was a student and he had no local money. Opposite Party No.1 has given only 10 GB Pounds to the Complainant which is meager amount. So the Complainant was not able to purchase meal for himself at London Airport. Therefore, we hold that the Complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party No.1.
8) The Complainant has requested to direct Opposite Party No.1 to pay to the Complainant an amount of Rs.8,000/- incurred by the Complainant at London Airport alongwith interest. He has also requested to direct Opposite Party No.1 to pay sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the Complainant for mental agony, inconvenience, harassment caused to him and Rs.12,000/- towards additional charge paid for change in date of travel. He has claimed Rs.25,000/- as cost of this proceeding from the Opposite Party No.1. The Complainant has not claimed any relief from Opposite Party No.2.
9) As discussed above, due to the delay in Opposite Party’s flight from New York to London, the Complainant missed connecting flight to Mumbai and he was constrained to stay at London for more than 10 hours. As per the Complainant, he was not having money. When he went to the Consumer Care Desk of Opposite Party No.1, staff of Opposite Party No.1 behaved rudely and refused to provide accommodation and other help to the Complainant. Opposite Party No.1 gave only 10 GB Pounds to the Complainant. The Complainant as per advised of his father, went to the home of his father’s friend at Central London by taxi and borrowed Rs.8,000/- and incurred necessary expenses. The Complainant has not adduced evidence regarding the amount borrowed by him from his father’s friend. He had also not adduced documentary evidence to prove expenses incurred in London during aforesaid period of 10 hours. However, it is admitted fact that for about 10 hours the Complainant is required to stay at London as his flight was missed. It is admitted fact that Opposite Party did not made any provision for the Complainant’s accommodation and for his meal, etc. The Complainant had gone to his father’s friend’s house by a taxi. For aforesaid purpose the Complainant must have incurred considerable amount. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we think it just to direct Opposite Party No.1 to pay to the Complainant an amount of Rs.5,000/- as amount incurred by him at London alongwith interest @ 10 % p.a. from 02/07/2010 till realization of entire amount.
10) The Complainant has claimed Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony, harassment and inconvenience. The amount claimed by the Complainant is exorbitant. The Complainant has not adduced any evidence to justify aforesaid claim of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. He has not adduced evidence to prove that he has incurred Rs.12,000/- as additional charges for change in the date of travel. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we think it just to direct Opposite Party No.1 to pay to the Complainant Rs.10,000/- for mental agony, inconvenience and harassment. Further, we think it just to direct Opposite Party No.1 to the Complainant an amount of Rs.5,000/- as cost of this proceeding. Hence, we answer point no.2 accordingly.
The complaint against Opposite Party No.1 is partly allowed and dismissed against Opposite Party No.2. Hence, we pass following order -
O R D E R
i.Complaint No.234/2010 is partly allowed against Opposite Party No.1.
ii.Opposite Party No.1 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand Only) to the Complainant
towards expenses incurred at London with interest @ 10 % p.a. on aforesaid amount from 02/07/2010 till
realization of entire amount.
iii.Opposite Party No.1 is directed to pay to the Complainant an amount of Rs10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand Only) as
compensation for mental agony and inconvenience and Rs.5,000/-(Rs. Five Thousand Only) towards cost of
this proceeding.
iv.Opposite Party No.1 shall comply with the aforesaid order within 1 month from the date of receipt of this order.
v.Complaint against Opposite Party No.2 is dismissed with no order as to cost.
vi. Certified copies of this order be furnished to the parties.
