By Smt. C.S. Sulekha Beevi, President,<br /> <br /> 1. Complainants who are husband and wife were to travel to Jeddah for their Haj Pilgrimage, and while returning they intended to visit their children at Dubai. They booked their itinerary air tickets through second opposite party. Complainants undertook travel in six member SYS group of second opposite party. The first sector of the tickets issued was for their travel from Kozhikkode-Mumbai,<br /> Mumbai-Jeddah. The second sector was Jeddah-Dubai and the third sector was Dubai-Mumbai-Kozhikode. Complainants started their journey on 05-01-2003 from Nedumbasseri, Cochin instead of Kozhikkode as per instructions of Air India due to the re-scheduling of flight. After Haj complainants reached Jeddah for taking their flight to Dubai. The tickets to Dubai scheduled on 18-02-2003 were confirmed with Emirate Airlines by second opposite party, since all the tickets of the group were in the possession of second opposite party. Complainants along with other passengers were brought to Jeddah airport on 18-02-2003 by second opposite party. At the ticket counter it was found that the ticket jacket did not contain the ticket coupon for their travel from Jeddah to Dubai but it contained the ticket coupon for their travel for first sector (Kozhikode-Mumbai) which they had already travelled. On verification of details in the computer it was seen that complainants had confirmed tickets. They were denied boarding for not having the ticket coupon with them. Complainants begged for mercy of officials of Air India to help them out of the situation, but was of no use. The officials of Air India affirmed to them that they have to purchase fresh tickets for their travel to Dubai and that there were no seats available in the scheduled flight on 18-02-2003. Air India declined to help in any manner and did not even arrange accommodation for them. Totally stranded complainants then contacted their children at Dubai and with the help of their friends arranged accommodation in Jeddah. For this they had to incur expenses of SR 100 (Rs.1,400/-). They also had to purchase fresh tickets in Saudi Arabian Airlines on 19-02-2003 by spending SR 1360 (Rs.38,080/-) in order to travel to Dubai. The entire mishappening occurred only because the officials of Air India at Nedumbasseri, from where the complainants boarded their first sector of Travel, carelessly removed and cancelled the ticket coupon of their second sector instead of the first sector. That second opposite party who had possession of the tickets of the haj group failed to give custody of tickets sufficiently early and did not take due care. Complainant alleges deficiency in service and prays for Rs.39,480/- with interest towards financial loss, Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation for deficiency and Rs.5,000/- as cost of proceedings.<br /> 2. First opposite has filed version denying the contention that officials of Air India had torn out (removed and canceled) the ticket coupon of the first sector as well as another sector also on 05-01-2003 at Nedumbasseri airport. It is submitted that Air India does not have flight operation from Jeddah to Dubai and the alleged travel was by Emirates Airlines. That Air India has no role in their said flight. That officials of Emirates Airlines at Jeddah cannot accept passengers without proper flight coupons. That as per complaint itself, the complainants were included in SYS group of second opposite party and tickets were handed over to complainants by second opposite party only on 14-02-2003. The difficulty to complainants was due to failure on the part of second opposite party to check the tickets and to give custody of the tickets to complainants sufficiently early. Air India is not responsible for lapses on the side of second opposite party and has no direct involvement in the case. Air India is to be exonerated from any liability.<br /> 3. Second opposite party filed version admitting that a haj package tour was conducted in 2002, opposite party denies making arrangements for SYS group. That opposite party has no acquaintance with complainants and they have never approached second opposite party for purchase of tickets. If the complainants are sure they belonged to the 6 member SYS group, the said tickets might have been arranged by the officials of the said group through some other agencies. Complainants have impleaded second opposite party in these proceedings under wrong impression. The tickets if any issued is so issued according to confirmation given by first opposite party. Second opposite party is unaware of the incidents at Airport. Second opposite party denies having custody of the tickets till 14-02-2003. Their responsibility is over on handing over the confirmed tickets. Any inconveniences faced at Jeddah airport is connected with Air India alone and first opposite party has not committed any deficiency. Complainants are not entitled to any reliefs from second opposite party.<br /> 4. Evidence consists of affidavit filed by first complainant on behalf of himself and second complainant. Exts.A1 to A4 marked for them. First opposite party and second opposite party have filed separate counter affidavits. No documents marked for opposite parties.<br /> 5. Points for consideration:-<br /> (i) Whether opposite parties are deficient in service.<br /> (ii) If so reliefs and costs.<br /> 6. Point (i):-<br /> Complainants are aggrieved that even though they had confirmed tickets they were not able to travel from Jeddah to Dubai, on 18-02-2003. Ext.A1(a) and (b) which are photocopies of the tickets prove that the tickets were issued through the branch office of second opposite party by Air India. Both opposite parties do not have a case that the alleged second sector of ticket was not confirmed. Complainants contend that on reaching the ticket checking counter at Jeddah airport they came to realize that the officials of Air India at Nedumbasseri had wrongly removed the second sector of ticket coupon from the ticket jacket instead of tearing and removing the first sector of ticket coupon. On verification of computer network it was found that the list of passengers in the particular flight exhibited their names. Complainants allege that though they begged for help and assistance of Air India officials at Jeddah airport the officials of Air India turned a deaf ear. Complainants were asked to purchase fresh tickets if they intended to travel to Dubai. Ext.A1(c) and (d) are the photocopies of the fresh tickets thus purchased by complainants in Saudi Arabian Airlines for their travel on 19-02-2003. It is also the case of complainants that Air India Officials failed to arrange any accommodation for their stay at Jeddah and they had to arrange accommodation by themselves with the help of friends of their children at Dubai. Ext.A4 is the receipt issued for charges incurred by complainants for their one day stay in Jeddah. They incurred SR 1360 per person to purchase fresh tickets.<br /> 7. The defence raised by Air India in the instant case, we have to say, is only of plain denials and vague attempts to by pass the liability and shift it upon second opposite party. Though it is contended by Air India that the second sector of travel from Jeddah to Dubai was by Emirates Airlines, Air India does not specifically deny the issuance of the said confirmed tickets, through them. Therefore the contention of Air India that they had no role to play in regard to the Travel by Emirates flight is untenable and unacceptable. If Air India has international code arrangements with any other international airlines and Air India issues confirmed tickets for such travel then it is the responsibility of Air India to provide necessary assistance and help to passengers. It is submitted by complainants that on verification of computer details at the ticket counter it was found that they held valid confirmed tickets. This contention is not specifically denied by Air India. The only reason for not allowing the complainants to board the plane was that there was no passenger coupon inside the ticket jacket. Complainants submit that the ticket jacket, instead contained the ticket coupon of their first sector of travel which was already undertaken by them. It is the case of complainants that the officials of Air India at Nedumbasseri Airport from where they boarded the plane on 05-01-2003 for their first sector of travel had negligently removed and cancelled the second sector of ticket coupon instead of removing the first sector coupon. From the chain of events narrated by the complainants with proper links supported by documents we are able to conclude that this contention put forward by the complainants is probable and true.<br /> 8. In such a situation the responsibility to help and assist the passenger is definitely upon Air India who has issued the tickets. Undoubtedly by checking the computer details and PNR the officials of Air India at Jeddah could verify and satisfy the bonafideness of the passengers. In case of loss of ticket or non-presentation of ticket at the counter Air India ought to have helped the complainants board the plane or make alternative arrangements. The contention of opposite party that without proper flight tickets Emirate Airlines at Jeddah could not have allowed the passengers to board the plane is rather too lame to accept when in todays world there are various possibilities of communication and spread of vast computer network. It is easy for Air India to check the computer and find out whether there were any adverse claimants for the said two seats. Air India could also have made facility for issuance of duplicate tickets. If there is any technical difficulty to issue duplicate tickets, Air India should have sorted out any arrangement allowing the complainants to travel by the scheduled flight along with their group. The act of Air India in not rendering any assistance to the complainants is nothing but sheer incensitiveness and gross dereliction of duty. Complainants have succeeded in establishing a case in their favour against first opposite party. We find first opposite party deficient in service.<br /> 9. The allegation raised against second opposite party is that second opposite party held the tickets in their custody till the last moment and failed to take sufficient care to verify and note the defects. Complainants contend that they were travelling in a group of six member SYS group under second opposite party. This is vehemently denied by second opposite party. Complainants do not state who was in charge of the group and what was the connection of this group with second opposite party. Second opposite party has only issued the tickets to complainants as confirmed by Air India. We do not find any direct involvement on the part of second opposite party in the mishappening. Complainants could have requested to hand over the tickets to them sufficiently early. We therefore are unable to find any deficiency in service on the part of second opposite party.<br /> 10. Point (ii):-<br /> Complainants pray for liquidated financial loss of Rs.39,480/- being expenses incurred for their stay at Jeddah and the fare of tickets purchased. Ext.A4 sufficiently proves that complainants incurred expenses of Rs.1,400/- for their stay at Jeddah. The fare of fresh tickets quoted in the complaint is not specifically controverted by opposite parties. Since the complainants had valid confirmed tickets Air India ought to have arranged their accommodation and alternate flight at the expenses of Air India. In case complainants have not received refund from Emirate for the unused sector of travel from Jeddah to Dubai on 18-02-2003 Air India is definitely liable to pay the expenses incurred by complainants for purchase of fresh tickets. We therefore hold that complainants are entitled to the amount of Rs.39,480/- from first opposite party.<br /> 11. Complainants are definitely to be compensated for the deficiency suffered by them. The plight of the complainants stranded in an unknown territory can be imagined. It was submitted by the counsel appearing for complainants, that the complainants are old aged and totally illiterate. The nation honours its' senior citizens by allowing various privileges and benefits. It is rather shameful that complainants herein, who are Senior Citizens had to undergo such discourteous and unhelpful attitude causing damage and dishonour to them. We are of the view, that an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation to each of the complainants for the deficiency, inconveniences and mental agony would not only be adequate remedy to the complainants but will also serve to improve the quality of service rendered by Air India. Second opposite party is exonerated from any liability.<br /> 12. In the result, we allow this complaint and order first opposite party to pay Rs.39,480/- (Rupees Thirty nine thousand, four hundred and eighty only) to both the complainants together and Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as compensation to each complainant along with costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) also to each complainant within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.<br /> <br /> Dated this 12th day of November, 2008.<br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-<br /> MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> APPENDIX<br /> <br /> <br /> Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil <br /> Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1 to A4<br /> Ext.A1(series) : Photo copy of the tickets. <br /> Ext.A2 : Photo copy of Passport of 2nd complainant.<br /> Ext.A3 : Photo copy of Passport of 1st complainant.<br /> Ext.A4 : Photo copy of receipt of 100 riyals dated, 19-02-2003 paid for stay at Jeddah.<br /> Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> Documents marked on the side of the opposite parties : Nil<br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> C.S. SULEKHA BEEVI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> Sd/-<br /> MOHAMMED MUSTAFA KOOTHRADAN, Sd/-<br /> MEMBER E. AYISHAKUTTY, MEMBER