DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Ms. Lata Sikri, R/o 5004, Mani Majra Housing Complex, Chandigarh 160101

…..Complainant

                           V E R S U S

1]    Local Office-Kingfisher Airlines Ltd., SCO 59-60, Sector 19-D, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh.

2]    Registered Office-Kingfisher Airlines Ltd., 12^th Floor, UB Tower, UB City, No. Vital Mallaya Road, Bangalore 560 001.

3]    Head Office-Kingfisher Airlines Ltd., Kingfisher House, Western Express Highway, Ville Parle (East), Mumbai 400099.

                                  ……Opposite Parties

CORAM:   SH.P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT

                                SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER

              DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER

Argued by: Sh.Suresh Chutani, Auth. Repr. of Complainant.

                Sh.Y.S. Dhillon, Counsel for OPs.

PER DR.(MRS)MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA,MEMBER

              The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (as amended upto date) “hereinafter referred to as the Act”. Briefly stated, the complainant booked Air ticket for Bidar via Hyderabad of Kingfisher Airlines for flight No.IT-802 dated30.5.2010 through Airpak Travels Chandigarh which was scheduled to take off at 0925 from Delhi and was to arrive at Hyderabad 1135 hrs. Complainant also booked return ticket of 3^rd June, 2010 from Hyderabad to Delhi and Delhi to Chandigarh vide flight No.9W2258 & 9W 733 of Jet Airlines consecutively [Annexure-I & II]. The averment of the complainant is that at the Airport the OPs issued boarding passes to all her male colleagues standing in the same line, but she was denied the same. The complainant insisted the OPs to issue her boarding pass, but all her efforts turned futile and the flight took off. Ultimately, boarding pass of another Airlines i.e. Spice Jet [Annexure-III & IV], was issued, which scheduled to depart in the late hours at 1545 hrs and was to arrive at Hyderabad at 1800 hrs and she was given in writing that surface transport would be provided by Hyderabad Airport Authority for Bidar [Annexure-V]. The complainant contended that the Airport authority provided her a taxi, but the driver took her to wrong direction, that again took 6 hours to reach the destination, which caused lot of fear and insecurity. The complainant wrote a letter to this effect to the Kingfisher Airlines and they regretted the inconvenience and offered the complainant complimentary return ticket on Kingfisher Airlines which could be used at any of their flights on domestic route. Despite harrowing experience the complainant not dragging the matter further, made an offer to the airlines, if it offers a package of 3 people (me, husband and son) for a week to any destination in India then it could be considered. But the same was not considered by the OPs. Hence, this complaint.

2.           In their joint reply the OPs admitting factual matrix of the case, submitted that the complainant has already availed the services against the consideration paid by her to OPs. The OPs contended that the complainant was intimated regarding delay of flight and when the complainant reported for check in, all seats on the said flight were released and the complainant could not be accommodated.  However, the complainant was provided seat in Spice Jet Flight. She was also provided surface transport from Hyderabad to Bidar with driver who was well aware of the route. The OPs admitted receiving of e-mail from the complainant regarding her grievance and as a gesture of goodwill, she was offered complimentary ticket, which was refused by her. Denying all other allegations prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

3.           The Parties led evidence in support their contentions.

4.           We have heard the authorized representative of the Complainant and Learned Counsel for the OPs and have also perused the record. 

5.           The contention of the Complainant is that OPs had miserably failed to fulfill their contractual and lawful duty and it was due to callousness of their deck staff & gross mismanagement of the Airlines; that the journey, which was scheduled to be executed in just 4½ hours, transformed into 16 hrs, thereby causing lot of suffering and trauma to her. She further asserted that she was singled out and compelled to travel by other airlines, after delay of nearly 8 hrs, despite confirmed and re-affirmed (through OPs’ SMS) status of the ticket. Such, unilateral action of the OPs was authoritative, as well as arbitrary.  As such, a trauma of 16 hrs. caused stress, depression, agony, risk of life, caused due to OPs unfair trade practices and utter disregard to their lawful duty. They have misused their authority in contravention of the provisions of law, for which they are liable to be penalized.  

6.           Whereas, the OPs, in their joint written statement, expressed exaggerated claims and misrepresentation of facts stated by the Complainant in the complaint.   The OPs rather pleaded that all efforts were made to ensure that the Complainant should reach her destination smoothly and comfortably, for which, she was offered an alternative travel arrangement, the same day, but could not be accommodated in the flight departing before Spice Jet, due to non-availability of seats. So much so, the surface transport was also arranged, for which the OPs were not duty bound. The OPs denied the allegation that she was singled out. It was further clarified that boarding was granted on ‘First come – First served’ basis, as per the terms and conditions [Annexure-III].

7.           OP argued that when the Complainant conveyed her dissatisfaction to the authorities, an offer of complementary return ticket was made, that can be used on any domestic flight of the OPs. OPs repeated and reiterated that there was no deficiency in providing service to the Complainant and rather, relied upon Point No. 9.3, specified in the terms and conditions, referred to above. 

8.           Going minutely through the sequence of events of the case and perusing the entire documents placed on record by the respective parties, it is evidently clear, as well as an admitted fact that the Complainant has been denied boarding pass, despite confirmed status of the ticket and further, re-affirmed via SMS by the OPs. As per communication between the parties [Annexure VI to IX], the Chairman’s office of Kingfisher Airlines had acknowledged as under:-

“We acknowledge your feedback regarding your experience with Kingfisher Airlines. Please accept our regrets for any inconvenience caused. Your comments have been forwarded to the concerned team and the matter is currently being looked into.” [Annexure-VII]

Such comments, referred to above, left no room of any doubt, that the Complainant was virtually harassed at the hands of the OPs. Otherwise also, the Complainant was compelled to execute her journey in an extraordinary delayed time and went on wriggling from one airlines to another i.e. from Kingfisher Airlines to Indigo Airlines and then to Jet Airlines and finally to Spice Jet Airlines. 

9.           So much so, OPs even failed to pass correct information with regard to flight position and availability of a seat for the aggrieved passenger. Therefore, deficiency in service in a way acknowledged and admitted by the OPs, even unfair trade practice is also self-explanatory. Offering a complementary return ticket is just to console the Complainant and to defuse the situation, which occurred due to mismanagement of the Airlines.

10.         In view of the foregoings, it has been observed that the OPs were under legal obligation to provide hassle free and comfortable journey to their potential customers/ consumers; which they have failed while dealing with the situation in the present complaint.

11.         From the above detailed analysis of the entire case, we are of the considered opinion that the complaint must succeed. So, we accept the complaint and decide the same in favour of the Complainant and against the OPs. The OPs are directed to issue a complementary return ticket to the Complainant [as agreed], on any domestic flights operated by them. OPs are further directed to pay Rs.30,000/- to the Complainant, jointly and severally, towards compensation for physical harassment, as well as mental agony caused to her, along with Rs.10,000/- as costs of litigation. This order be complied with by the OPs, within one month, from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which, they shall pay the awarded amount along with penal interest @12% per annum from the date of filing of present complaint i.e. 04.10.2010, till the date of realization, apart from cost of litigation i.e. Rs.10,000/-.

12.         Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.