DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSSAL FORUM

WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

 

CASE NO:  CC – 91  of   2017

 

        1. Sri Antardeep Das,

S/O- Sri Ananda Das,

Old Kalibari Road, Krishnanagar,

P.O. Agartala, P.S. West Agartala,

West Tripura.

 

      2. Sri Shubham Bhowmik,

S/o- Sri Dilip Kr. Bhowmik,

Sukantala Palli, Purba Dhwajanagar,

Gomati, Udaipur- 799 114. ….......…...Complainants.

 

              -VERSUS-

 

Managing Director, Indigo Airlines,

Central Wing Ground Floor,

Thapar House, 124,

Janapath, New Delhi- 110 001,

India, 

F  + 91 11- 543513200

Email:-Corporate @ goindigo.in

CIN:- L62100PL2004PLC 129768

For comments, Concerning Civil Aviation

Requirements, Sections- 3,

Air Transport, Series in, Part- IV,

Write to Nodal officer minizes Thomas at.  .......... Opposite Party.

 

__________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI A. PAL,

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

 DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SRI U. DAS

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

C o u n s e l

 

For the Complainant : Sri Pijush Kanti Chakraborty,

  Advocate.   

 

For the O.P. : Sri Koushik Roy,

Mrs. Sumana Debbarma,

Sri Udai Sankar Singha,

Advocates.

  

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON:  16.05.2018.

J U D G M E N T

This case arises on the petition filed by Antardeep Das. Petitioner's case in short is that on 24.06.2017 both the petitioners went to Indigo Airport, Delhi to perform their journey to Agartala by Indigo flight. They arrived in time after taking boarding pass and security check-in both the petitioners went to the lounge and were waiting before the gate. But the flight of Indigo 6E 681 left the airport without taking them. Their luggage was brought down from the aircraft and it was delivered to them. The petitioners requested Indigo authority for arranging another flight but their request turned down. So they had to stay at Delhi and the on the next date by another flight they went to Guahati as no flight was available from Delhi to Agartala. From Delhi to Guwahati and then to Agartala through Guahati they came to Agartala. They had to stay in the hotel and suffered mental agony due to the deficiency of Indigo. They could not attend the meeting on 25.06.2017 at Agartala and suffered huge loss. Petitioner claimed Rs.5 lacs as compensation. 

 

2. O.P. Indigo Airlines appeared, submitted written statement denying the claim. It is stated that petitioner did not appear before the gate 25 minutes before departure. Petitioner being customer must be present at the boarding gate not later than the time specified by Indigo but they failed to do so. They reported at 5.32 AM. Only 18 minutes prior to schedule departure not 25 minutes. So they are treated  as 'Gate No Show' and could not avail the flight. Booking amount however, was not forfeited and Indigo offered the complainant the alternative flight on payment of applicable charges. Complainant accepted the offer and on 25.06.2017 went to Agartala through Guahati on the next day and the same was confirmed of payment of Rs.16,400/-. There was no deficiency of service by the Indigo authority.

 

3. On the basis of contention raised by the parties following points cropped up for determination:

(I) Whether both the petitioners appeared before the gate in time and were denied to board the aircraft?

(II) Whether the O.P. Indigo have deficiency of service and petitioner is entitled to get compensation?

 

4. Claimant petitioner side produced the boarding pass, air ticket, invoice, boarding pass. Petitioner also produced the statement on affidavit of Ananda Das.

 

5. O.P. on the other hand produced the letter of authority, certified of Board Resolution approved by board of Director of Indigo, certificate of Incorporate of Interglobe Aviation Ltd., Indigo Condition of Carriage and also Sales Support ticket details. O.P. declined to give any oral evidence.

6. On the basis of all these evidence on record we shall now determine the above points.

 

Findings and decision.

7. It is admitted and established fact that both the petitioner Antardeep Das and Shubham Bhowmik purchased the tickets for availing the journey on 24.06.2017. Petitioners filed this case but later on they are absent and case was conducted by the father of the petitioner, Antardeep Das as the attorney. Power of attorney was submitted authorizing Ananda Das for conducting the case. Accordingly the attorney appeared and deposed  in favour of the complainants. 

 

8. O.P. in their written statement admitted that on 24.06.17 both the petitioners purchased the tickets of Indigo Airlines for availing journey from Delhi to Agartala. 

 

9. We have gone through the boarding pass produced by the petitioners. From the boarding pass it is found that the departure time was 5.50. Gate No. 6B as depicted in the boarding pass. Both the tickets were purchased. 

 

10. We have gone through the tickets. Tickets were purchased on payment of Rs.12,701/- . It is also admitted fact that petitioner could not avail the aircraft and perform the journey after getting the boarding pass. 

 

11. O.P. Indigo Airlines in their written statement stated that petitioners arrived before the gate only 18 minutes before the departure not in schedule time within 25 minutes so they were denied to avail the aircraft. O.P. failed to give any evidence in support of their contention. The registered list not produced to show that 'Gate No Show' was shown in any display system. It is true that New Delhi Airport is a silent airport and announcement not possible but there is no evidence to support that the Indigo staff searched the petitioners in the gate or in the security place or render possible service to the petitioner for availing the aircraft. Petitioner attended counter and got the boarding pass thereafter security check was also done. After security check-in they are supposed to arrive before the gate No. 6B. But they could not avail the aircraft as it left  without taking them.

 

12. O.P. Indigo Airlines could not provide any alternative flight on that date for availing journey from Delhi to Agartala so both the petitioners had to stay at Delhi and on the next day on 25th June 2017 they came to Guahati from Delhi by another flight and from Guwahati to Agartala. 

 

13. In the written statement, O.P. stated that the ticket was provided by the Indigo for the next day journey through Guahati. We have gone through the tickets and found that the next date they actually availed the journey through Guahati. It was the connecting flight and according to O.P. Rs.16,400/- was paid by the petitioners as fare of the flight. The sales support certificate as produced shows that Rs.16,400/- was paid by the petitioner. 

 

14. As there was no latches on the part of the petitioners who after security check attended before the gate and was denied the aircraft after getting the boarding pass & O.P. could not produce single piece of evidence to support that the petitioner were late and did not attend before the gate 25 minutes of the departure time before 5.50 AM on 25th June 2017 therefore it is established that the Indigo Airlines had deficiency of service and by their negligence and deficiency of service petitioners suffered. They had to stay at Delhi  for one night and on the next day they came to Agartala via Guahati by payment of Rs.16,400/-. Petitioner is entitled to get compensation, air fare and also cost of litigation. In our considered view petitioner is entitled to get air fare Rs.16,400/- for availing their journey from Delhi to Agartala on the next day through Guahati. They are also entitled to get Rs.10,000/- for one night stay at hotel. In addition they are entitle to get Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost and Rs.5,000/- for mental agony and sufferings. In total they are entitled to get Rs.36,400/-. Both the points are decided accordingly. 

 

15. In view of our above findings over the two points we direct the O.P., Indigo Airlines to pay Rs.36,400/- to the petitioner. Payment is to be made within 2(two) months, if not paid it will carry interest @ 9% P.A.        

 

Announced.

 

 

 

 

SRI A. PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

 

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA SRI  U. DAS

MEMBER,

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL FORUM, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA