Delhi

New Delhi

CC/602/2008

Vinod K.Goel Advocvate - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. India Global Enterprises Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

17 Jul 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/602/08                             Dated:

In the matter of:

Vinod K. Goel, Advocate,

Ch.no.120 (Civil),

Tiz Hazari Courts,

Delhi-110054

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

1. The Managing Director, M/s. Indigo,
2. The Managing Director, M/s. IndiaGlobal Enterprises Ltd.,

Both at: 124, Thapar House,

Janpath, New Delhi-110001

 

3. The Managing Director,

M/s. Indigo, Level 1, Tower-C

Global Business Park,

        Mehrauli Gurgaon Road,

        Gurgaon-122002, Haryana

 

                                         ……. OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

 

ORDER

President: C.K Chaturvedi                      

 

The facts of the complaint are that the complaisant with his wife had a confirmed ticket from Bangalore to Delhi for 01.05.08. It is alleged that they reached the check in counter at 4.26 Pm, but the officials of OP did not allow them to board the flight and the attendant rather allowed two other passengers who came after them to be accommodated and the flight left without them. The Op in its reply has alleged that the allegations are wrong. As per their terms of contract the passengers are required to report at least 30 minutes before departure. In this case the flight was late by 10 minutes but despite that the complainants did not reach in time and they were declared “No Show” and the ticket amount was forfeited and the due amount was returned to them. It is also stated that 151 passengers on the flight and it left with 149 passengers with last passenger checking at 4.24 PM, when the gates were closed. It is alleged that complainant protested and himself wrote on the ticket 4.26pm, though the official has reported the arrival at 16:37 PM.

We have considered the pleadings, the documents place on record, the evidence and heard the submissions. In order to clinch the truth, the OP was directed to place on record the list of passengers. The OP has placed the list of 149 passengers and showing two passengers not reporting till closing of gates. This falsifies the case of the complainant that two other passengers were preferred over them. OP has also placed on record the print of the screen at arrival which shows the arrival of the passengers just 10 minutes before the departure, as against the requirement of at least 30 minutes mandate of arrival for check in. It is proved on record that complainant reached late and the OP airline had already closed the gates after waiting and had to leave with 2 short passengers. In these facts and circumstances, we do not find any deficiency on the part of OP, and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

        Pronounced in open Court on 17.07.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

 (Ritu Garodia)

 MEMBER