(Delivered on 10/10/2017)

Per Smt. Jayshree Yengal, Hon’ble Member

1. This appeal challenges the order dated 7/9/2015, passed by the District Consumer Forum, Nagpur, partly allowing the consumer complaint bearing No. 248/2014  and thereby directing the opposite party ( for short OP) Indigo Airlines/appellant herein  to pay the complainant Rs. 3,803.59/-, the forfeited amount of the airlines ticket, Rs. 4,276.50/- towards other ticket which the complainant was required to purchase Rs. 1,050/- towards taxi fare, that is total Rs. 9,130/- with 9 percent per annum interest till realization. Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- to be paid by the OP to the complainant as compensation for mental and physical harassment and cost of proceeding respectively.
2. The respondent Miss Avantika Gangadhar Chitnavis is referred as complainant  and appellant Indigo Airlines, Level –I Gurgaon is referred as opposite party ( for short OP) for the sake of convenience.
3. Facts in brief as set out by the complainant   in the consumer complaint are as under.

1. Complainant purchased two returned tickets by online booking on 9/12/2013 for flights 6E136 from Nagpur to New Delhi on 16/1/2014 and 6E137 for flight from New Delhi to Nagpur for 22/1/2014, run by  the OP airlines services. The airlines ticket was a joint ticket in the name of Miss Avantika Chitnavis and Miss Rashmi Tikku for the total cost of Rs. 15214/-It is the contention of the complainant that journey from Nagpur to New Delhi was successfully  undertaken by the joint ticket holders on 16/1/2014. The returned journey was scheduled on 22/1/2014. It is the contention of the complainant that her co-passenger Miss Rashmi Tikku reached the airport early and she asked for the boarding pass for both the passengers of the joint ticket. The OP airlines company refused to give the boarding pass of the complainant for the reason that the person who is to undertake the journey should be present and the boarding pass  is given only to persons/passengers who are personally present and who are to undertake the journey.
2. The complainant on her arrival at the airport stood in queue to reach the check-in  counter. When the complainant reached the counter, she was informed that she could not board the flight as it was less than 45 minutes for the departure of the flight.  It was shocking for the complainant. So she  requested the staff present there to allow her to board the flight. The said request was consistently made by both the passengers that is the complainant and her co-passenger Miss Rashmi Tikku. As none of the staff member accepted the request of the complainant and her co-passengers, the complainant asked her co-passenger Miss Rashmi Tikku to board the flight. The complainant was also informed that her ticket had been confiscated. The co-passenger Miss Rashmi Tikku thereafter passed through the security check up and boarded the flight.
3. It is further contended by the complainant that she was asked by the OP to  purchase another ticket for her flight to Nagpur which was available only at 5.45 am the next day. The complainant then would have to stay overnight at Delhi. She was staying at Connaught  place which was far away from the airport. Therefore the complainant thought it to be unsafe to travel  at such wee hours of the morning . The complainant therefore enquired at the terminal for other flights if available in the same evening. No flight was available that evening. The complainant purchased a flight ticket of Go-Air airlines which was slightly later than the aforesaid flight. It is the contention of the complainant that when she had undertaken journey from Nagpur to Delhi on 16/1/2014 with her co-passenger Miss Rashmi Tikku, she had obtained the boarding pass by web checking at home and she had directly  got the security check done and boarded the flight of the OP/airlines. It is the contention of the complainant that if the airlines ticket is the joint ticket then the boarding pass can be obtained by any one co-passenger on behalf of the other passenger. The OP/airlines services had neither informed her orally or endorsed on the ticket that the boarding pass would be handed over to every passenger personally. The complainant alleging deficiency in service, filed the consumer complaint and sought for total compensation of Rs. 63133.50 which is inclusive of cost of the ticket with mutual confiscated by the OP, the taxi fare, the cost of the Go-Air ticket and compensation for mental and physical harassment and cost of proceeding respectively.

4. The OP/Indigo Airlines resisted the complaint by filing its written version and denied all the adverse allegation of the complainant. The OP in its written version has specifically submitted   that the complainant is under contractual obligation to follow the contractual terms of the OP as mentioned on the air tickets as well as on Conditions of Carriage. Admittedly the complainant was neither present personally at the time of taking the boarding pass nor she reached the check-in counter 45 minutes prior to the scheduled departure of the flight. Therefore  the OP denied to have rendered deficient  service to the complainant  and sought for dismissal of the complaint.
5. The Forum after hearing both the sides partly allowed the complaint as aforesaid and directed the OP /appellant herein Indigo airlines to pay the complainant the cost of the airline tickets with compensation.
6. The Forum has held that the OP has rendered deficiency in service by refusing to hand over the boarding pass to the co-passenger. The terms and conditions which are printed on the air ticket does not mention that the passenger should be personally present for taking the boarding pass.
7. The OP Indigo airline feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order has challenged the same by filing this appeal.
8. We heard counsel for the appellant and perused the written notes of arguments filed by both the parties. We also perused copies  of the complaint, written version and documents filed on record.
9. The only issue that survives for our consideration is whether the appellant is justified in refusing the issuance of boarding pass to the co-passenger and confiscating the ticket. The term and condition No. 3 that  is  printed on the air ticket issued by the appellant reflects as

“ Please obtain your boarding pass from Check-in counter, 75 minutes (International Sector)/45 minutes (Domestic Sector) prior to departure. Failure to do so will result in your booking being cancelled  and fares and surcharges  retained. Report early for hassel free check-in.

     The said ticket reflects the names of both the passengers that is 1. Ms Avantika Chitnavis and 2. Ms Rashmi Tikku.

10. The only inference that can be drawn is that the terms and conditions are applicable to the passengers named in the ticket. The terms and conditions nowhere mention that in case of joint ticket either  of  passengers is authorized to receive the boarding pass. The above condition No. 3 shows that passenger is personally required to obtain boarding pass 45 minutes prior to departure.
11. It is admitted by the complainant that she reached for the security check less than 45 minutes prior to the time of departure.
12. It is also not the case of the original complainant/respondent herein  that she had availed web check-in at the time of return journey. Although the complainant has mentioned that  on 16/01/2014 for undertaking journey from Nagpur to Delhi.  She had  done a web check in and obtained the printed boarding pass at home and went for security check directly at the airport to board the flight. But nowhere has she submitted that  for undertaking return journey on 22/01/2014. She had obtained boarding pass by web checking at home. She has  also not brought any cogent evidence on record to show that  she had obtained the boarding pass for her co-passenger also. Hence  it can said that appellant is justified in refusing the issuance of boarding pass to the co-passenger and confiscating the ticket of respondent herein.
13. The impugned order therefore cannot be sustained in law and for the foregoing reason the appeal deserves to be allowed and as a  result we pass the following order.

ORDER

1. The appeal is allowed.
2. The impugned order dated 7/9/2015 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Nagpur in consumer complaint bearing No. 248/2014  is quashed and set aside.
3. Complaint bearing No. 248/2014 stands dismissed.
4. No order as to cost in appeal.
5. Copy of order be furnished to both the parties, free of cost.