PRESENT

                   Complainant by representative Shri. Jayesh Sindhav present.    

                    Opponent absent.        

ORDER

(Per- Mr. S. D. MADAKE, Hon’ble President.)

1.                The complainant has filed complaint against opponent for deficiency in service in airline service.

2.                The complainant stated that, he had gone to Aurangabad for attending and arguing consumer cases with his advocate Shri. Anand Patwardhan and had booked two return tickets.  On 10.09.2010 in opponent Airlines Flight No. IT-4140 scheduled to depart form Aurangabad to Mumbai at 20.25 hours on 13.10.2010.

3.                The complainant alleged that said flight was cancelled without any prior intimation.  The complainant requested opponent to help them  and to make alternate arrangement for the flight,  however no cognizance was taken by opposite party , except to ask for refund of amount.

4.                The complainant sated that he booked two tickets on emergency basis by paying Rs.18,500/-.  He sent letter to opponent dated 15.10.2010 narrating incident and requested for refund of amount , however till date said amount is not  refunded by opponent.

5.                The complainant sent notice to opponent through Advocate on 11.11.2010 for claiming amount with compensation for mental agony, hardship and financial loss, due to deficiency in service by opponent.

6.                The complainants prayed that opponent be directed to pay Rs.12,500/- i.e. ticket fare as well as Rs.18,500/- ticket fare paid for alternate flight, along  with compensation as well cost and professional charges paid to counsel.

7.                The Opposite party filed written statement and resisted the complaint stating that complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious which  has been filed to extract money.

8.                The opponent stated that this forum has no jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint.

9.                The opponent stated that, Flight No.IT-4140 scheduled to operate from Aurangabad to Mumbai on 13.10.2010 was cancelled due to technical problems as the aircraft “VT-DKJ”  scheduled to operate the aforesaid sector was grounded at Bhavnagar due to hard landing.  This cancellation took place on 13.10.2010 at 16.12 hrs.   This did not provide sufficient time to inform all passengers regarding cancellation.

10.              The opposite party stated that, it is clearly mentioned in terms and conditions of opposite party Airline that flight timings are subject to change and do not form a part of contract of carriage and airlines shall not be liable for the same.

11.              The opponent stated that complainant was asked to accept full refund as there was no alternate arrangement.  It is submitted that there was no willful negligence, complainant was advise to contact his travel agent  for his booking since his booking was made through travel agency.

12.              The opponent party deny any responsibility for any loss, mental agony and submits that complaint be dismissed with exemplary cost.

13.              We have perused complaint, written statement supported by affidavits as well as documents produced on record.  Both sides filed affidavit of evidence.  The complainant filed written argument.  We have carefully studied the rules and regulations regarding kingfisher Airlines.

14.              Admittedly, complainant and his advocate, could not travel due to cancellation of flight for returning to Mumbai from Aurangabad on 13.10.2010.  The cancellation was due to technical problems and beyond the control of opponent.

15.              The opponent has till this date not returned the amount of Rs. 12,500/-  paid for ticket, through expressed willingness  to refund since the date of cancellation.   The opponent was under an obligation to refund amount to complainant and it was unjust to direct him again to contact travel agent for the refund.

16.              The opposite party was expected to inform individually , immediately regarding cancellation  of plane  to complainant.  The failure to do so amount to deficiency in service.  The complainant and his counsel  had to wait for alternate accommodation and lastly after 45 minutes they were informed for claim of refund.

17.              We are of considered view that opponent was liable to make alternate arrangement for the complainant.  Opponent failed to state its inability to make alternate arrangement.  The complainant was required to travel by paying Rs.18,500/- and was subjected to mental agony and inconvenience.

18.              We hold that, opponent is liable to pay the amount of refund due to cancellation of flight as well as compensation for mental agony, financial loss as well as inconvenience caused due to non-co-operation of opponent,  as per law laid down under section 73 of contract Act. We quantify the total amount of compensation of Rs. 25,000/- and the amount of refund.  The claim of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation  is excessive.  The claim for professional charges is too remote and hence cannot be considered.  The complainant  is entitle for cost of  Rs. 7,500/-

19.              We pass the  following order.

                                                  ORDER

1)         RBT Complaint No. 217/2011  is partly allowed.

2)         The opponent is ordered to pay Rs.12,500/- with interest at the rate of

            18 % p.a. from 13.10.2010 till realization of amount.

3)         The opponent is ordered to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental

            agony, financial loss, and inconvenience with interest at the rate of 9 %

            from date of admission of complaint i.e. 22.06.2011.

4.         The opposite party is ordered to pay Rs.7,500/- to complainant as cost

           Of complaint.  

5.        Copy of this order be sent to both parties.