The case of the complainant in brief is that on 07-07-12 the complainant purchased air ticket from OP No.4 for a journey on 23-07-12 from Lokpriya Gopinath Bordoloi Airport, Borjhar, Guwahati to Dibrugarh vide Jet Connect Service bearing Ticket No.5892310040401, PNR No.JRLCZD. The ticket was duly confirmed and was “OK”. On 23-07-12 at about 10AM the claimant reported LGBN Airport to proceed to Dibrugarh and contacted with the staff of the OP to get a boarding pass. But complainant was surprised that the staff of the OP refused to give boarding pass to the complainant and told that due to excess booking they are cancelling the ticket of the complainant.  hearing from the staff of the OP the complainant was surprised to know regarding the excess booking of ticket by the OP. The complainant being in charge of the police station at Dibrugarh P.S. was urgently required to come to Dibrugarh due to law and order situation.  So, he booked a taxi from Guwahati to Dibrugarh though long journey by taxi is not suitable for his health. The complainant therefore, had to undergone mental agony for whole journey with anxiety. All these things happened due to sheer negligence on the part of OP which is amount to deficiency in service. The complainant being a consumer of the OP suffered mental and physical harassment for the negligence of the OP. The complainant thereafter issued a notice to the OP through his lawyer on 27-07-12 demanding refund of the fare, compensation etc, which was duly received by the OPs but made no any reply.  The complainant also issued notice to OPs through e-mails on customer relation@ jet airways.com but no reply was received from the OPs as such, the act of the OPs were out and out deficiency in service due to their negligence for which the complainant filed this case claiming refund of the ticket fare of Rs.3400/- @ 18% interest, taxi fare of Rs.8000/- and Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment along with cost of the litigation.

      After registering the case notices were issued to all the OPs to  which they contested the case by filing  written statement stating inter -alia that the case is not maintainable in law as well as in fact. The OP denies the allegation made by the complainant and stated that the denial of boarding pass was not due to fault of the OP but because of it is a common practice in the airline industry, which is allowed by the authority subject to the payment of compensation. Boarding pass could not be issued to the complainant for the excess capacity for the type of aircraft use. As soon as boarding pass was refused to issue, the complainant was given an option to travel by the next flight to Dibrugarh but the complainant refused to accept the offer. Main reason for not issuing the boarding pass was due to excess sale of air ticket being undertaken by Jet Airways which was sold in excess of the capacity allowed. Further, it is stated that it is an international practice in the airline industries and is done to avoid loss to the airline operators in case of cancellation as often happened in the last moment. So airline issue few more tickets basing historical data on particular flight, taking into account of cancellations and single ‘no shows’.  In such a case passenger presenting themselves at the counter cannot be issued boarding pass and hence, cannot accommodate in the flight in spite of having confirmed ticket. As soon as the complainant presented himself before the counter the boarding pass against all the seats for the flight had already been issued for which the complainant could not be accommodated. It was purely circumstantial and rare incident. In such a case, the OP has also provided remedy to the passenger in the circumstances state above and accordingly the complainant was given an option to fly on the next day to Dibrugarh which was flatly refused by the complainant. Complainant was  also given an alternative to travel to Dibrugarh by private taxi at the expenses of OPs which was also surprisingly refused by him. Complainant was also handed over his ticket refund coupon issued by the travel agent. The OP further stated that on account of this adamant behaviour of the complainant, he had discharged, the liability of the  OPs if any and had also given up his claim as per Civil Aviation Requirement for which the OP cannot be held responsible and liable in respect of the grievance of the complainant. Since the complainant has not accepted the offer given by the OP he has no option to switch over to another form of compensation. The complainant has declined the offer of the OPs and hired a taxi at his will which cannot be allowed. In view of the said rule, the complainant cannot claim false and vexatious amount on the OPs. The OP states that the relief claimed by the complainant is arbitrary, inflated and does not warrant any indulgence and that no relief claimed by the complainant can be granted. Therefore, the OP prayed to dismiss the case against the OPs.

In this case, complainant gave his evidence by swearing affidavit and exhibited as many as  9(nine) documents in support of his  case. On the other hand, one Sri S. Swaminathan, Station Manager of Jet Airways was examined on behalf of the OP and exhibited as many as 4 (four) documents to rebut the case of the complainant.

       Both the parties submitted their written arguments.

                                   DISCUSSION, DECISION AND REASONS THEREOF :

Upon going through the evidence, documentary evidence and written argument advanced by the parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant purchased an air ticket from OP No.4 to perform journey on 23-07-12 by air from Guwahati to Dibrugarh by Jet Airways (India) Ltd vide Ticket No.5892310040401 and PNR No.JRLCZD. The said ticket was confirmed and also been “OK”. Accordingly, on the particular day i.e. 23-07-12 the complainant reached Gopinath Bordoloi Airport, Borjhar, Guwahati at 10AM for boarding in the plan and approached to the staff of the OP to get the boarding pass, but the OP refused to issue boarding pass to the complainant showing that due to excess booking of the tickets the boarding pass of the complainant was refused. The OPs have not denied all these facts.

The OPs submitted that the refusal to issue boarding pass was entirely circumstantial which did not occur before. It is stated that it is a normal practice in the airline industry to avoid the losses to the airline industries in case of  cancellations which happened in the last moment. As such, all the airlines booked/ or issue extra ticket to the passengers so that no seat remain vacant at the time of departure of the flight. In the instant case as all  the seats of the flight were filled before coming of the complainant the boarding pass to the complainant could not be issued and accommodated in the flight in spite of having confirmed ticket. The OPs never had such intention to deny boarding pass to the complainant and in rare cases such incident occurred. However, the OP stated that they have given first option to the complainant to fly next day which the complainant refused. The complainant was also given alternative arrangement to go to Dibrugarh by private taxi at the expenses of OPs which was also refused by the complainant.

Under the above circumstances, it is to be considered whether there was any valid ground for refusal of boarding to the complainant and there was no negligence on the part of the OPs and thereby the OPs have not committed any deficiency in service.

It is admitted fact that OPs had denied the boarding pass to the complainant. The OPs stated that the denial was not intentional, but the circumstances compelled them to  deny the boarding pass. It is was not due to any mistake or deliberate act on the part of the OP. The reason behind the refusal of boarding pass by the OP is that in many times the passengers who hold a confirmed and valid booking do not or unable to report for travel before time as such, to reduce the possibility of flight departing with unoccupied or empty seat, the airlines over books flights to a limited extent. Normally, the airlines need not deny the boarding pass to the passengers. But in some times airlines may have more passengers reporting for particular flight due to reported by all the valid booking and in that case the persons who are coming lately boarding pass may be denied. In case the boarding is denied to any of the passenger the passengers are entitled to the compensation and accordingly compensations are paid. Following are the terms and conditions under the head denial boarding.

“ (I) Denied Boarding:

Many a time, passengers who hold a confirmed & valid booking, do not or are unable to report (i.e. ‘No Show’) for travel before the time specified by the airline ... ... ...

To reduce the possibility of flight departing with unoccupied or empty  seats, the airlines overbook, flights to a limited extent. In such overbooking cases, an airline may have more guests reporting for particular flight than the seats available and as such, may need to deny boarding to some of the guests.

.................................................

In case you are denied boarding involuntarily on a flight for which you hold a confirmed reservation, you are entitled to the following monetary compensation.

1. The monetary compensation indicated below shall be given only if the amount of tickets costs is higher than compensation amount.

1. Rs.2000/- or the value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having a block time upto and including one hour.
2. Rs.3000/- or value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having block time of more than one hour and upto and including two hours.
3. Rs.4000/- or the value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having block time or more than two hours

If the cost of the ticket is less than the amount of compensation indicated above you will be entitled to an amount equivalent to the ticket cost in addition to refund of air ticket.

2. ......................
3. Additionally, you will be offered the choice between the following:

1. Refund of air ticket at the price it was purchased, OR

2. A flight to the first point of departure, OR

3. Alternate transportation under comparable/ alternate  mode of transport (whenever applicable), to the final destination, OR

4. Alternate transportation under comparable/ alternate mode of transport (whenever applicable) to the final destination at a later date, at the passenger’s convenience, subject to availability of seats.

4. You shall be offered the above alternatives listed paragraph (C) above. Once you have selected the option you will not have the option to switch another form of compensation.”

 Further, sale of the tickets to the passengers are also governed by the provisions of 3.5.3 of the Civil Aviation Requirement (CAR) as prescribed by the Director General of Civil Aviation, and governing the contract of carriage by air which read as follows:

 Para 3.5.3 of the said CAR in particular, reads as follows:

3.5.1 The financial compensation indicated below shall be given only ( if the amount of tickets costs is higher than compensation amount:

d)  Rs.2000/- or the value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having  a  block time of upto  and including one hour.

e) Rs.3000/- or the value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having block time of more than one hour and upto and including two hours.

f) Rs.4000/- or the value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having block time or more than two hours.

If the cost of the ticket is less than the amount of compensation indicated above, the airline will be liable to compensate an amount equivalent to the ticket cost in addition to refund of air ticket.

3.5.2 The compensation referred to in para 3.5.1 shall be paid in cash, by bank transfer or with the signed agreement of the passenger in the form of travel vouchers in accordance with CAR Sectiuon3, Series M, Part II.

3.5.3 Additionally, the passenger shall be offered the choice between the  following :

 a)  Refund of air ticket at the price it was purchased.

b)  A flight to the first point of departure.

c) Alternate transportation under comparable/ alternate mode of transport (whenever applicable), to the final destination.

d) Alternate transportation under comparable/ alternate mode of transport (whenever applicable), to their final destination at a later date at the passenger’s convenience, subject to availability of seats.

3.5.4 The affected passenger shall be offered compensation alternatives listed in Para3.5.1 and Para 3.5.3 above and once the option has been selected the affected passenger will not have the option to switch to another form of compensation.”

Accordingly, it appears that there are some norms and guidelines for redressal of the governance in case of denied boarding which are bound by the complainant and the OPs.

On the denial of the boarding to the complainant as per tyerms and condition of the air carriage complainant was offered

1. Hiranya Kumar Bora was given the option to fly the next day which was flatly refused by the complainant.
2. He was also given an alternative to travel to Dibrugarh by private taxi at the expenses of Jet Airways (India) Ltd which was also refused by the complainant.
3. OP also handed over his ticket refund coupon issued by the travel agent dated 24^th July, 2012 for one way fare from Guwahati to Dibrugarh which is annexed as Ext-B as because all the boarding pass against the available seat for the flight had already been issued by the time the complainant presented himself for collecting his boarding pass. But the complainant did not avail any of the above option instead of availing the above and alternative make his own arrangement and at his own cost. According to the OP they cannot compensate the complainant for making his own arrangement by refusing the option given by the OP as per provision of the rules. However, the complainant failed to show or prove as to why he failed to avail the option given by the OPs. The OP given him the option to travel to Dibrugarh by private taxi at the expenses of the OP, but the complainant refused the same and  instead of that he arranged taxi by himself which is best known to the complainant which the complainant is not entitled. As such, there was no negligence on the part of the OP as alleged and hence no deficiency  in service.  The OPs clearly submitted their travelling rules and regulations governing the airline industry, terms and conditions of contract carriage in case of denied boarding as part of working and process of airline industry which cannot be avoided.

It is pertinent to mention here that the OPs mentions all these facts in their written statement whereas, the complainant in his evidence on oath, in spite of being aware of the said fact has not specifically denied or commented on the said refund of air fare or any of the option provided by the OPs whereas, OPs have proved all the fact by documents. The complainant has also not mentioned regarding the refund of the air fare either in the complaint or in his evidence. The complainant neither in his complaint nor his evidence stated that the OPs provided alternative mode of transportation or by way of accommodation in another flight. The complainant is totally silent in this respect for which it appears to believe that complainant is not genuine and suppressing the material fact. The complainant instead of accepting the offer given by the OPs of travelling by the next day flight or accepting the offer of travelling to Dibrugarh by private taxi as to be arranged by the OPs he himself hired a taxi and submitted a receipt as Ext-2 of amounting of Rs.8000/- which is not at all acceptable. If the complainant had to travel by taxi he had to avail the offer given by the OPs instead of arranging a taxi by himself.

Besides, complainant has submitted simply a receipt Ext-2 as taxi fare but he has failed to examine or adduce any evidence as to the author of the said receipt and also failed to examine the evidence of taxi driver and regarding the payment of Rs.8000/- and thereby failed to prove that the said taxi was used by the complainant for travelling from Guwahati to Dibrugarh.  Complainant also failed to prove that he arrived the airport earlier and the OP did not issue the boarding pass, complainant has also failed to prove regarding his urgency by evidence. He also failed to submit medical certificate to prove that he was not able to travel by road due to health condition. He also failed to prove that denial of boarding was deliberate act of the OP.  The OPs have proved that denying boarding is an allowed practice within the industry and in exceptional cases the boarding pass is denied. Even if boarding pass is denied the passenger is compensated to the limit as set by the rules and regulations framed by the governing authority and as per the terms of contract of carriage and said compensation including refund of ticket fare was given to the complainant. Whereas, the complainant did not take up the offer of alternative mode of travel given to him by the OPs. As such, complainant is not entitled to any relief as prayed for.

        In view of the above discussions we are of the considered view that the act of the OPs is not intentional and nor it is by any mistake or deliberate act, as such, there was no negligence on the part of the OP and thereby committed no deficiency in service for which claim of the complainant cannot be allowed. The case is dismissed on merit.

No cost is allowed to any party.