This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

          Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that he is working in the Anthropological Survey of India, Govt. of India, Port Blair, Andaman & Nicobar Islands and for his proposed journey from Port Blair to Kolkata on 21-01-2013, he booked air tickets from the IRCTC website (www.air.irctc.co.in) on 18-12-2012 at 12-17 p.m. for self, wife and daughter of Go Air Flight No.G8-102 with PNR No.HX6KS7 by paying the total amount of Rs.13,441/-.

          On the date of journey on 21-01-2013, he along with his family reached at Port Blair Airport at 11-05 a.m. and the schedule departure of Go Air Flight No.G8-102 was at 11.45 a.m.  But officials of Go Air Lines refused to accept them at their check in counter and denied the boarding passes for that booked Air tickets and also refused to do any alternative arrangements of other flight to reach in Kolkata though there was the contact mobile number of the complainant in the said booking slip.  But Go Air Officials did not intimate earlier the exact time of reporting at the Airport and about their ground for refusal of air tickets and also ultimately denied refund of the money for which the complainant purchased ticket for their journey by Spice-Jet by further paying Rs.16,956/- and for which this complaint is filed for redressal before the Ld. Forum for negligent and deficient manner of service.

          In its written version the OPs1 and 2 admitted that the complainant had booked air ticket for Go Air Flight on IRCTC Website against PNR HX6KS7, Flight of G8102 and paid an amount of Rs.13,441/- online for himself and two other passengers.  But the said booking was governed by the terms and conditions mentioned on the IRCTC and Go Air website.  In the said terms and conditions it is specifically stated that passenger had to report 60(sixty) minutes prior to the schedule departure time of the Flight and the check in counter closes 40 minutes prior to the schedule departure time of the flight and the boarding gates closes 20(twenty) minutes prior to the schedule departure time of the flight.  The complainant cannot plead ignorance of the government guidelines relating to checking by passengers at the airport.  The complainant had reported at late at the airport and was rightly denied boarding on the aircraft by the concern airline.  The complainant also cannot take the advantage of his own wrong.  It is also stated that the Go Air Flight G8 102 was scheduled to depart at 11-45 a.m. and as per rules of the airlines, the complainant was required to report at 10-45 a.m., however, the complainant reported in the check in counter at 11:23 a.m. as per the official record when the counter had already closed by that time, exactly 40 minutes prior to the schedule departure time of the flight and the complainant reported 22 minutes prior to the departure of the flight.  Fact remains the Go Air Staff would have accommodated the complainant only if the complainant had reported before closing of the counter.  Once the counter is closed, it cannot be reopened under any circumstances and passengers cannot be allowed to board the flight.  So, the complainant himself is negligent and is trying to cover his own laches.  The air ticket issued by IRCTC carries names of the passengers and details of the flight and provide the facility for reserving the ticket through its website only.  The name of the complainant as a passenger and also the fare charged as shown in the ticket was transferred to the respective airlines and in this respect, IRCTC had acted only as an intermediary.  Thus, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the IRCTC and no relief can be claimed against them.

          In the version of OPs 3,4 and 5 it is admitted that the OP1 (IRCTC) duly issued an Electronic Reservation Slip against PNR No.HX6KS7 for journey by Go Airlines Flight No.68-102 and complainant paid a sum of Rs.13,441/- towards the cost of tickets.  This Electronic Reservations Slip also mentions that for accessing all the rules and restrictions applicable to the airfare, the purchasers can call to number given therein or check on the airlines website also given therein.  The complainant could have viewed the e-ticket after getting the PNR number from the website of the OP5 mentioned in air-ticket.

          The departure time mentioned in the e-ticket of the Go Air Flight No.G8-102 was at 11:45 a.m. on 21^st January, 2013.  The complainant along with his family reached at the counter of the OP5 at 11:20 hrs which is 25 minutes before the schedule departure time.  As per Government Guideline, check in counter at all the airport close 40(forty) minutes before the schedule departure time is fixed.  The complainant reached the counter of the OP5 which is proved from the endorsement on e-ticket annexed by the complainant as Annexure1 of the complaint and also the noting done in the record of reservation system, maintained by the OP5 and the copy of the reservation history for confirmation number HX6KS7 shows that the passenger segment status changed to “No Show” on 21^st January, 2013.

          In the circumstances, the allegations made by the complainant are totally incorrect, baseless and are therefore, denied.  There is no fault and/or deficiency in service on the part of the Go Airlines (India) Ltd. in respect of the rendering service to the passengers including the complainant herein and therefore, the complaint deserves to be dismissed at the very threshold.

Decision with Reasons

After indepth study of the complaint, the written version and also complainant’s own documents in respect of Air Tickets, it is found that he paid Rs.13,441/- and purchased the air tickets of Go Air through IRCTC by website www.air.irctc.co.in on 18-12-2012 for himself, wife and daughter(two years old) for air travel from Port Blair to Kolkata Airport on 21-01-2013 which is admitted by the OPs.

          The main contention of the complainant is that though he reached the Airport of Port Blair in time to the check in counter at 11:05 a.m. but was denied to board the airplane on the plea that he was late in arriving to the Airport.  Even on several persuasions, the officials present at the Airport neither made alternative arrangement by another flight nor returned the amount of the airfare, instead it arrival time is endorsed on the air ticket at 11:20 a.m. and the fare of the air ticket had been forfeited by them.

          The OPs 1 and 2 contended that the Go Air Flight 68 102 was scheduled to depart at 11.45 a.m. and as per rules of the airlines, the complainant was required to report by 10.45 a.m. but the complainant reported in check in counter at 11:23 a.m. as per official record when the counter had already been closed by that time and once the counter is closed, it cannot be reopened under any circumstances and passengers cannot be allowed to board the flight.  In its submission the OPs1 and 2 also stated that the name of the passenger (complainant) and the fare charged as shown in the ticket was transferred to the respective airlines and in this respect IRCTC had acted only as an intermediary.  Thus there is no deficiency of service on the part of the IRCTC and no relief can be claimed against them.

          Taking entire matter into consideration and also the conduct of the OPs it is clear that OP Go Airlines (India) Ltd. already received the money i.e. Rs.13,144/- towards the cost of Air tickets of Port Blair to Kolkata from the complainant.

          In defence OPs 3 to 5 stated that the complainant with his family reached the check in counter of Port Blair Airport at 11:20 hrs of 25 minutes before the schedule departure of the flight at 11:45 hrs.  Therefore, the complainant was not allowed to board the flight as the complainant had not reached Airport within stipulated time and so there is fault on the part of the complainant and for which OP5 cannot be held responsible and liable.

          On scrutiny, it is found that OP/Go Air Airlines has made a note on the Electronic Reservation Slip i.e. IRCTC online air ticket of the complainant that he and his family reported at the Port Blair airport after the counter closed at 11:20 hrs, but the ticket issued by the OP IRCTC, nowhere they have mentioned the reporting time of the passengers at the airport or the closer time of the check in counters at the airport.  Though IRCTC have mentioned the passengers details, Airline Rules & Regulations and other different information on their issued air-tickets but nowhere they have mentioned the timing of airport arrival or reporting time of the passengers at the airport before the departure of schedule flights and, as such, the complainant should not only be blamed by them that due to delay in arriving at the Port Blair Airport the check in counter of the Airport was closed as alleged by the OP.  Even, when the complainant requested them i.e. OP5 to make alternative arrangement by another flight, but they flatly denied and also did not return the amount of the fair on the ground that due to late arrival, the air fare amount had been forfeited by the OP/Go Line Airport Authority.  But in its affidavit, the complainant made this submission that in a letter No.2010/IRCTC/HRD/RTI/ 1809 dated 18-05-2013 from the Right to Information Act, 2005, he received the answers of his some questionnaire that the said rule to reach the counter of the Go Air has been implemented after purchasing his ticket and no such timings were endorsed on the ticket or anywhere.  The said timing has come into effect on and from 15-03-2013 and 27-02-2013.

          Under the above facts and circumstances, the plea for forfeiture of his air fare amount as claimed by Go Air Line Authority is not at all justified but even then the complainant had to bear the burnt of pain and had to pay another air fare amount of Rs.16,956/- to purchase the Air-tickets of Spice Jet for their arrival at Kolkata on the same day along with his family.

          So, considering the answers of Go Airlines Authority against RTI application of the complainant as given by the OP’s authority supply proves that passengers were not intimated about the stipulated time of arrival at the Airport prior to 27-02-2013 or prior to date of journey and OP’s authority has admitted that said rule came into force on and from 27-02-2013 and so it is proved that prior to date of journey (21-01-2013) there was no information about stipulated time of arrival in the Airport on the date of journey and in the Air ticket no such stipulated time of arrival at Airport was noted and invariably at that time there was no such rule for arrival at Airport in such stipulated time though ticket was purchased on 18-12-2012.  So, it is proved beyond any manner of doubt that OP Airlines Authority had its deficiency and negligence on their part for which complainant was harassed and was denied Air Flight journey for his no fault.

          For such sort of negligent and deficient manner of service of OP/Go Air Lines authority, we are inclined to hold that there is deficiency of service on their part u/s.2(1)(g) and (r) of the C.P. Act, 1986 for causing hardship, mental anxiety and discomfort and harassment of the complainant and, as such, the OP/Go Air Lines are liable to refund the booking money and also to pay compensation at least Rs.6,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- and shall pay to the complainant, when entire allegation of the complainant is proved and no laches on the part of the complainant is found.

In the result, the case succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OPs with a litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-.

          The OPs 3 to 5 are jointly and severally directed to refund the cost of the Air ticket i.e. Rs.13,441/- and to pay compensation of Rs.6,000/- to the complainant for such negligent act as rendered by them.

          The OPs will have to comply the above order very strictly within 30(thirty) days failing which for non-compliance and disobeyance of Forum’s order OPs will have to pay punitive damages @Rs.100/- per day till full satisfaction of the decree and, if any reluctant attitude of the OPs are found for complying the Forum’s order in that case penal proceeding u/s.27 of the C.P. Act, 1986 shall be initiated against the OPs.