CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD

Dated this the 16^th  day of February, 2017

PRESENT  : SMT. SHINY.P.R, PRESIDENT                           Date of filing: 05/03/2015

                  : SMT.SUMA K.P, MEMBER

                  : SRI. V.P.ANANTHA NARAYANAN, MEMBER

CC/29/2015

  1.Jisha Palakkazhi,

     W/o. Radhakrishnan Chenganakkattil,

     Chenganakkattil House, Palode P.O,

     Mannarkkad College-678583, Palakkad,Kerala.

 2. Anupallavi Chenganakkattil (Minor),

     D/o. Radhakrishnan, Chenganakkattil,

    Chenganakkattil House, Palode P.O,

    Mannarkkad College-678583, Palakkad, Kerala. 

                                                                                                :   Complainants

 3. Anjali Chenganakkattil (Minor),

     D/o. Radhakrishnan, Chenganakkattil,

     Chenganakkattil House, Palode P.O,

     Mannarkkad College-678583, Palakkad, Kerala.

 4. Arjun Chenganakkattil (Minor),

     D/o. Radhakrishnan, Chenganakkattil,

     Chenganakkattil House, Palodo P.O,

     Mannarkkad College-678583, Palakkad, Kerala.

                                                                       Vs

1. The Manager,

      M/s. Air Arabia, MG Road,

      Ravipuram, Perumannoor,

      Ernakulam, Kerala-692015.

                                                                                                :     Opposite parties

2. M/s. Akbar Travels of India,

      Noori Baug,

      Next to Kumaria Presidency Hotel, Opposite the

      Leela Andheri, Kurla Road, Andheri East,

      Mumbai-400003.

3. M/s. Sun city Travels,

Hospital Junction, Mannarkkad P.O.,

Mannarkkad-678582, Palakkad Dist. Kerala.                                                                              

O R D E R

By Smt. Suma K.P.Member

The complainants in this case are the wife and the children of Mr.Radhakrishnan Chenganakkattil, who is employed in Qatar for the last 23 years. During the time of vacation they had decided to spent one month time with the husband/father. He had arranged one month tourist visa to visit Qatar where he was employed. In pursuance with the said visa issued to them they had availed air tickets to fly from Cochin International Airport to Doha, Qatar, via Sharjah, UAE on 2^nd April 2014. They have booked their air tickets through opposite parties 2 and 3. The tickets were issued to them and after availing the air tickets they have confirmed reservation in advance. After reaching at Cochin International Airport they have shown their air tickets and it is alleged that the first opposite party has denied boarding and did not issued boarding pass to the complainants without any valid reason. The further alleged that the officials of the first opposite party denied the boarding pass stating the reasons that the complainants failed to show 5000 QR with each of them. They further alleges that the staff of the first opposite party behaved in a very impolite manner and with cruelty and insulted them. Due to this incident they could not go to Qatar on 02/04/2014 from Kochi. Thereafter on 07/04/2014 they have travelled to Qatar to Kochi. Due to the above incident they had sustained financial loss and also mental agony, torture and insult. Hence he had approached before the forum seeking a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- from the opposite parties.

The opposite parties entered appearance upon the notice from the forum and filed their respective versions. The second and Third opposite party contended that they are unnecessarily parties to the proceedings as the incident had occurred inside the airport. They have not committed any deficiency of service and negligence. Hence they had to be exonerated from any liability. But at the same time they admitted the fact that flight tickets were arranged by them and having issued to the complainants. The first opposite party had also filed their version stating the following their contentions. There is no deficiency of service as alleged by the complainant on the alleged date of their journey. It is admitted that the complainants were having an air tickets with reservation issued by the opposite parties 2 and 3. It is also found correct that they were not permitted to get a boarding pass which would enable the complainants to board in the flight. The reason is that they did not carry a minimum requirement of the amount of QR 5000 so as to support the duration of the stay. It is specifically stated and informed to the passengers on the day with all politeness that they could not travel because of the non compliance of this rule. It was also informed to them that the first opposite party is helpless in this regard as an when they permit the passengers without having on showing proof of having 5000 QR, passenger would be denied the entry into the country and first opposite party will be imposed with a huge file. That is for this reason they have denied the boarding pass to the complainant and invariably could not travel as on 02/04/2014. Both parties filed their chief affidavits. The evidence in this case consists of Oral testimony which includes the cross examination of the complainant and her husband as PW1 and PW2 and cross examination of the officials of the first opposite parties as DW1 and DW2. Ext.A1- A16 was marked from the part of the complainant and B1- B5 was marked on the part of opposite party.

Issues that arise for consideration

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?

2. If so, what is the relief and cost entitled to the complainant?

Issue No.1

According to the first opposite party they have did their job purely by observing and following the rules and regulations issued by a statutory authority. The following law and regulations will not amount to deficiency of service, even if perhaps that has cost a little bit of inconvenience and hardships to the complainants. They further submitted that this fact is revealed by the clear admission of PW2 during cross examination. “ hnk tSwkv B³Uv  I­oj³kv {]Imcw 5000  QR ssIhiw hbv¡Wsa¶v F\nbv¡dnbmw”.   According to 1^st opposite party it is lawfully mandated and it is bound to be followed by all passengers which include the complainants. The contention of the complainant that they had travelled through another airline on 07/04/2014 to Qatar without complying the above condition. Hence it can be inferred that there is no hard and fast rules by the Qatar airlines that each and every passenger should possess QR 5000 with them during the journey. The another contention of the complainant is that the first opposite party were cheated the complainants by denying boarding pass to them. It is crystal clear that the staff of the first opposite party had over booked and to take the over booked passengers to the destination they were denying boarding to the complainants intentionally. To prove the above allegation they had produced Ext. A16 to show that the complainants 2 and 3 had travelled on the alleged day which was the details showing the passengers list issued from the office of the first opposite party. When cross examine about    Ext. A16.  DW1 deposed that the logo is admitted and the contends as well as the sender is different. If that be so, the first opposite party had not taken any steps for misusing their logo in the e-mails sent to the complainant. Hence it can be presumed that the said document was issued from the office of the first opposite party. Moreover if there was a statute to the effect that the passengers should possess sufficient funds to cover their stay and documents required for their next destination, the first opposite party should have definitely informed the said facts to the passengers well in advance before the journey. They should have imprinted the said conditions in the tickets issued to the passengers as mandatory conditions. Without doing so, opposite party 1 had committed gross deficiency of service and negligence on their part. Hence the complaint is allowed.

Issue no.1 is answered accordingly.

Issue no.2

The complainant submits that they had lost 5days stay and enjoyment in Qatar. They were also compelled to take new air tickets from Qatar airlines by paying Rs.88,000/- and the first opposite party did not refund the ticket charges paid to them. The complainants had to pay the travel expenses twice as the boarding was denied to them. The mental agony and insult suffered by them cannot be compensated in terms of money. However the complainants had claimed a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- on various heads. Considering the facts of the above case we direct the first opposite party to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only) as compensation for the mental agony and inconvenience caused to the complainants along with Rs.88,800/-(Rupees Eighty Eight thousand and eight hundred only) being cost of ticket paid by tickets from Qatar Airways, and also to pay Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as cost of  this litigation.

The afore said amount shall be paid within 1 month from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is entitled to get 9% interest for the said amount from the date of order till realization.

  Pronounced in the open court on 16^th February 2017.   

        Sd/-

     Smt. Shiny. P.R

                         President

                             Sd/-

             Smt. Suma. K.P

                           Member

                                                                                                 Sd/-   

           Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan

                          Member

A P P E N D I X

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1-    Receipt issued for visa fee by opposite party to the complainant .

Ext.A2- Tourist taxi Receipt dated 03/4/2014.

Ext.A3- Photocopy of E-ticket dated 30/4/2014.

Ext.A4- PNR status of mail copy dated 21/3/2014

Ext.A5-Complainant’s husband send to Air Arabia mail copy

          dated 09.4.2014

Ext.A6- Complainant’s husband send to Air Arabia mail copy

          dated 02.05.2014

Ext.A7- Air Arabia reply to Complainant’s husband dated 09/4/2014.

Ext.A8-  Checked baggage receipt

Ext.A9- Qatar airways to complainants E-boarding pass

Ext.A10- Qatar airways to complainants boarding pass

Ext.A11 series-complainants’ passport(relevant pages)(4 Nos)

Ext.A12-Passport copy of Complainant’s husband

Ext.A13-Tripsheet of contract Carriage/Tourist Taxi dated 6/4/2014

Ext.A14-Ticket payment receipt of complainants’

Ext.A15 series-Sanctioned visa copy(4 Nos.)

Ext.A16-(With objection)

Exhibits marked on the side of opposite Party

Ext.B1-Visa terms &condition

Ext.B2-General Conditions of carriage for passengers and baggage

         (subject proof)

Ext.B3-(subject proof)

Ext.B4-(with objection)

Ext.B5- Conditions of carriage for passengers and baggage

Witness marked on the side of complainant

PW1-Jisha Palakkazhi

PW2- Radhakrishnan Chenganakkattil,

Witness examined on the side of opposite party

DW1-1^st opposite party

DW2-2^nd opposite party

Cost Allowed

Rs.5000/-