Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/122/2014

P.Manishankar - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

P.Arumugarajan

20 Oct 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   07.03.2014

                                                                        Date of Order :   20.10.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO.122/2014

FRIDAY THIS  20^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017

1. Mr. P. Manishankar,

S/o. Paramasivam,

Sai Builders,

No.9, 100 Feet Road,

Velacherry, Chennai 600 042.       

 

2.Mr. K.R. Venkatesh,

S/o. Kannammal Ramachandran,

R.V.Construction,

10, Dass Avenue, Annai Indra Nagar,

Velacherry, Chennai 600 42.

 

3. Mr.V.Ramesh Babu,

S/o. Venkatasamy,

R.V. Construction,

10, Dass Avenue, Annai Indra Nagar,

Velacherry, Chennai 600 042.

 

4. Mr. K.Velayutham,

S/o. Kandasamy,

No.4, Veeramamunivar Street,

Near M.G.R. Road, Kanthanchavadi,

Perungudi, Chennai 600 096.                        .. Complainants

 

                                        ..Vs..

Ms. Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd.,

Rep. by its Manager,

2^nd Floor, Heavitree,

47, Spur Tank Road,

Chetpet, Chennai 600 031.                            .. Opposite party

 

Counsel for Complainants             :   M/s. P. Arumuga Rajan & another          

Counsel for opposite party            :   M/s. Pratheek Kaslikwal & another

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

 

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each towards compensation for mental agony and to pay cost of the complaint.

1. The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:

         The complainants submit that they are flat promoters and members of Metro flat promoters association.   The said association organized a vacation trip for its members to China; 26 members travelled in the opposite party air ways from Chennai to China on 29.7.2013 and returned to Chennai on 4.8.2013.   During the return journey on 4.8.2013 the complainants checked in at Shangal Pundong Airport on time for the scheduled departure at 19.00 hrs.   The said flight was scheduled to arrive at Hong Kong on the same day at 21.23 hrs. and the connecting flight from Hong Kong to Chennai was at 22.45 hrs. on the same day.    After completing with all formalities they proceeded to the boarding gates.   But to the shock and surprise it was announced that the flight was delayed.   The complainants questioned the opposite party stated that they have a connecting flight to catch, but the opposite party stating that they will be accommodated in the next immediate flight from Hong Kong to Chennai and the complainants were made to wait for  5 hours without proper reason and serving dinner and accommodation.   Thereafter the opposite party provided all the facilities including transport, hotel, dinner etc.    The complainants request for taking their basic needs including medicines; toiletries; clothes for the one day stay from their checked in baggage’s was turned down by the opposite party and the opposite party failed to provide them with cash to buy the same.   As such the act of  the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  Hence this complaint is filed.

2.    The brief averments in Written Version of  the  opposite party is  as follows:

      This opposite party deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.     The opposite party submit that  as per the civil aviation requirements; section-3 air transport; series “M” Part IV; issue I, dated 6^th August 2010  passed by the Director General of civil aviation. 

Section 3 clause 1.5.

“Additionally, airlines would also not be liable to pay any compensation in respect of cancellation and delays clearly attributable to Air Traffic Control (ATC), metrological conditions; security risks, or any other cause that are beyond the control of the airline but which affect their ability to operate flights on schedule.

Clause 3.3.4

“No cost compensation shall be payable to any of the affected passengers in the event;

1. They do not accept the alternative travel arrangements made by the airline or
2. The cancellations occur due to extra-ordinary circumstances beyond the control of the airline (as described in para 1.5) even if all reasonable measures had been taken by the airline.  An operating airline shall not be obliged to adhere to para 3.6 if the delay is caused due to extra ordinary circumstances as defined in para 1.4 and para 1.5 which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.”

Therefore in the light  of above mentioned principles the opposite party will not be  held responsible for the delay caused to the complainants.  Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant have filed proof affidavit as their evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite party filed and no documents marked on the side of the opposite party.

 

4.   The points for the consideration is:  

Whether the complainants are entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each towards compensation for mental agony with cost as prayed for?

 

5.      ON POINT:

        The complainants and their counsel has not preferred to file any written argument and not turned up to advance any oral argument for long time.  Hence the argument of complainant closed.  The complainants pleaded in the complaint and stated in the proof affidavit that they are the flat promoters and members of Metro flat promoters association.   The said association organized a vacation trip for its members to China.   26 members travelled in the opposite party air ways from Chennai to China on 29.7.2013 and returned to Chennai on 4.8.2013.   During the return journey on 4.8.2013 the complainants were checked in at Shangal Pundong Airport on time for the scheduled departure of the flight at 19.00 hrs.    The said flight was scheduled to arrive at Hong Kong on the same day at 21.23 hrs. and the connecting flight from Hong Kong to Chennai was at 22.45 hrs. on the same day.    After completing with all formalities they proceeded to the boarding gates.   But to the shock and surprise it was announced that the flight was delayed.   The complainants questioned the opposite party stating that they have a connecting flight to catch, but the opposite party stated that they will be accommodated in the next immediate flight from Hong Kong to Chennai and the complainants were made to wait for  5 hours without proper reason and serving dinner and accommodation.   Thereafter the opposite party provided all the facilities including transport, hotel, dinner etc.   The delay in providing such facilities caused great mental agony and the complainants are claiming a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation.    But the complainants has not explained in such manner for  claiming such huge amount.  

6.     The learned counsel for the opposite party contended that admittedly the complainants were travelled through opposite party’s flight No.CX 632 on 29.7.2013 from Chennai to Hong Kong and on 4.8.2013 on his return journey from Shanghai to Hong Kong; Hong Kong to Chennai.  There was no problem to the onward journey but there was a delay of incoming flight to connecting Shanghai to Hong Kong flight due to   Mythological; bad weather condition caused delay of 2 ½ hours.  In arrival of flight  The complainants contention is that the delay of 5 hours caused mental agony is not acceptable. The opposite party made all arrangements for suitable accommodation dinner; transport etc.; which was admitted by the complainants themselves.   The delay of flight  is neither  wanton  nor willful but it is only caused due to climatic condition and delay of connection flight. The claim made by the complainant is imaginary and baseless. The opposite party also made suitable arrangement for enroot travel to Chennai, since the connection flight after weather condition turned up normal.   Considering  the  facts  and  circumstances  of  the  case  this  forum is  of the considered view that the complainant are not entitled for any relief  as prayed for in the complaint and the points 1 & 2 are answered accordingly. 

             In the result the complaint is dismissed.  No cost.

           Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 20^th day  of  October  2017.  

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

 

Complainants’ side documents:

Ex.A1- 26.7.2013  - Copy of E. ticket.

Ex.A2- 5.8.2013    - Copy of boarding pass.

Ex.A3-         -       - Copy of accommodation voucher.

Ex.A4- 3.9.2013    - Copy of legal notice to opposite party.

Ex.A5- 4.9.2013    - Copy of RPAD Card.

 

 

Opposite party’s side document: -     .. Nil..

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.