DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM  PALAKKAD

Dated this the  16^th   day of August 2017

Present   : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President

               : Smt.Suma.K.P.  Member                                 Date of filing:  10/03/2016

               : Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member

                                                      (C.C.No.38/2016)         

Jaison Manjali Represented by Power of

Attorney Holder and Brother Jenson.M.P,

S/o Manjali Paulose,

Manjali House, Elavampadam PO,

Palakakd 678 684.                                                    -        Complainant

(Adv.Dhananjayan)

 V/s

1.  M/s Srilankan Airlines Ltd,                                  -       Opposite party

     Airline centre, Bhandara naike,

     International Airport, Katunayake,

     Sri lanka.

2.  M/s Sri lankan Airlines Ltd,
     Rep. by Managing Director Level 3,

     East Tower, World Trade Centre Echelon Square,

    Colombo, Sri lanka.

3.  M/s Usha Karthik, Officer-in-charge/Authorized signatory of

      M/s Srilankan Airlines, Cochin International Airport,

     39/4570, Ground Floor, Palal Tower, MG Road,

    Ravipuram, Ernakulam 680 016.

4.  Prasad, Proprietor,

      Sunrise Travels, IV 1014, Soorya Complex,

      T.B N.H Road, Vadakkancherry, Palakkad

      678 633.

O R D E R

By Smt.Suma.K.P. Member

The complainant here in is represented by the Power of Attorney Holder who is the brother of the defacto complainant.  Complainant is a valid Indian Passport holder bearing Indian Passport No. G0929712 and is working as an employee (Weldor) in Project System Group at Damam in Saudi Arabia for the past 7 years.  The above complaint is filed for getting compensation on account of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice committed by the opposite parties.  The complainant has applied for a leave in connection with his marriage, the employer company has sanctioned the leave and has come to his home at Palakkad.  The company has issued him a return ticket also to his place of job.  The return ticket was issued by the company through the opposite parties 1 to 3.  The ticket is in the form of an electronic ticket.  The date of issuance of ticket is on 17.04.2014.  The schedule of his journey to his place of work was on 29.04.2014.  The journey was scheduled on 29.04.2014 from Kochi to Damam at 9.45 am via Colombo Bandara naike International Airport.  The company has paid the flight ticket charges for and on behalf of him.  As per the order of the company the complainant was ordered to arrive at Damam King Fahad International Airport on 29^th April at 20.10 hours without any fail and on the same day itself he was ordered to join on the duty.  The complainant was then ready and has arrived at Kochi International Airport, Nedumbassery, Cochi on 29^th April 2014 at 6.00 am ie 3 hours before the scheduled departure of flight as per International norms for international passengers.  He was keeping the original leave ticket receipt issued by opposite parties 1 & 2.  He has shown the ticket to the security gaurds along with original passport and they have permitted him to enter into the International Terminal.  After entering in the international terminal he has shown his travelling documents in original ie flight ticket, original passport, Visa issued by the company etc. to the officials of the opposite parties 1 & 2 and also to Cochin International Airport Authorities.  As per the rule, the opposite parties 1 &2 shall after scrutinizing the documents was legally required and bound to issue him the flight boarding pass and should order him to go for security checking and he was expecting that at once from opposite parties 1 &2.  But the officials of the opposite parties 1 to 3 have not issued him the boarding pass.  They have categorically told him that the complainant needs ECR (Emigration Clearance Certificate) from the Embassy of Saudi Arabia in order to travel to Damam.  The officials of opposite parties 1,2 &3 informed and insisted the complainant that he needs Emigration Clearance Certificate from the Embassy of Saudi Arabia and after producing it only they will issue boarding pass to him, which would enable him to travel abroad.  If the opposite parties did not issue boarding pass he cannot enter in to the flight to go to his work place.  Actually for the complainant, Emigration Clearance Certificate from the various authorities was not required since it was a “Re- Entry Visa”.  The complainant had explained all this things to the officials of opposite parties, but all his request and cries were denied by the officials of the opposite parties.  They neither issued boarding pass and eventually he had been ordered to quit from the airport and ordered him to produce Emigration Clearance Certificate.  The complainant though submitted true facts and actual position concerning, they did not hear those at all, and impolitely shown the door and asked him to vacate the airport.  They had also threatened that he will be prosecuted alleging various offences if not vacated.  He was forced to come out from the airport with depression.  Then the complainant sent a letter ie email communication to the opposite parties 1 to 3.  Even after that there was no positive redressal of his grievance, later they have responded but that was not at all sufficient, as it actually did not redress his genuine grievance and financial loss and mental agony suffered by him.  Hence, he has sent another email asking them to consider his present situation and to provide a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-.  Though the complainant has having all valid travel documents and credentials and has also explained everything in detail, the non providing of issuance of boarding pass to travelling flight, so as to join his duty in Damam would amount to glaring and unpardonable deficiency of service committed by opposite parties 1 to 4.  The complainant then lodged many representations to opposite parties.  At last they sent a reply by which they have admitted their mistake and have tendered their apology but the tendency of apology will not absolve liability, loss, inconvenience, hardship and mental agony suffered by him.  The non - issuance of boarding pass and there by not allowing the complainant to go to his work place though he was having all travel documents and credentials it is a clear and grave case of deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties 1 to 3.  As the complainant has not reach on 29^th April 2014, his employer did not renew the Visa and subsequently he lost his good job and also lost his service benefits, the gravity of this was quite deterrent especially when he has lost his job just after his marriage.  He was force to remain as unemployed for no fault of him.  Subsequently he has to arrange a new Visa and recently he has gone to Doha, Qutar.  For all these mishaps opposite parties 1 to 3 are directly responsible.  When the complainant clarified the situation to the officials of the opposite parties 1 to 3 that Emigration Clearance was not required, as it was a Re- Entry Visa they could have been heard the complainant and could have consulted with either of his employer or atleast to the authorities of Saudi Arabian Airlines.  In this case from the records it can be seen that the opposite parties 1 to 3 have taken an adamant stand and tightfisted stand.  Thus as stated, the complainant has lost his job, his service benefit for six years and has also suffered a lot of financial emotional and mental agony.  The complainant quantifies his total loss as Rs.20,00,000/- for the deficiency of service which he had suffered from opposite parties 1 to 3.  The complainant has approached Sunrise Travels, Vadakkancherry (4^th opposite party) for Visa stamping and that has been done through Akbar Travels of India Pvt. Ltd, Sultanpet, Palakkad.  Both of them are in no way responsible for the loss and hardship suffered by the complainant, but at the same time a crucial act of transaction have been taken place through them.  Hence, 4^th opposite party is impleaded in the party array and no relief is sought against him.  4^th opposite party has issued a certificate to the complainant that the Visa stamping of the complainant for Saudi Re-Entry Visa of the complainant bearing passport No. G0929712 with that effect.  Hence, it can be seen that the part of cause of action of this case has taken place at Vadakkancherry and Palakkad were the 4^th opposite party is carrying on business.  The complainant submits that opposite parties 1 to 3 are legally liable to compensate the complainant for their acts and torts committed by them.  Hence this complaint is filed seeking an order directing the opposite parties 1 to 3 to pay Rs.20,00,000/- as total compensation to the complainant with cost of this litigation. 

Notice was issued to the opposite parties for appearance.

  Opposite party 3 and 4 entered appearance but did not filed their version.  Subsequently they were absent for further proceedings hence they were called absent and set ex-parte.  Complainant filed application to enquire about the delivery of notice against opposite party 1 & 2.  Accordingly notice to Postal Authorities was issued about the delivery of notices to opposite party 1 &2.  They issued a report stating that notices to opposite party 1 & 2 were served.  Hence they were called absent and set ex-parte.

          Complainant filed Chief Affidavit along with documents.  Ext.A1 to A7 was marked, Ext.X1 series also marked.  Evidence was closed and matter was heard. 

The following issues that arises for consideration are.

1.Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite parties ?

2.If so what are the relief and cost?

Issues No.1 , 2

We have perused the documents as well as affidavit filed by the

complainant.  Ext.A6 is the letter issued on behalf of opposite party 1 to 3 to the complainant through email tendering apology for the inconvenience faced by the complainant as a result of the said situation.  Since there is no contradictory evidence to disprove the allegations stated in the complaint we allow the above complaint.  The complainant had not produced any evidences to prove about loss of income due to the above situation.  Hence we direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) as compensation for the deficiency of service committed by them.  We also direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as cost of this litigation. 

          The afore said amount shall be paid within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which complainant will be entitled to realize interest at the rate of 9% p.a from the date of order till realization. 

Pronounced in the open court on this the 16^th   day of August 2017.

                                                                                                                                 Sd/-

                      Shiny.P.R.

                      President 

                           Sd/-

                      Suma.K.P.

                      Member

                Sd/-

    V.P.Anantha Narayanan

                    Member

Appendix

Exhibits marked on the side of complainant

Ext.A1  -  Original Power of Attorney issued by the complainant in favour of his brother   

              Jenson.M.P dated. 16.05.2015.

Ext.A2   –  Photo Copy of the passport of the complainant bearing No.

               G0929712 (Containing three pages).

Ext.A3   –  Photo copy of Passenger Itinerary Receipt (Electronic Ticket) dated.

               17.04.2014.

Ext.A4   -  Photo copy of e mail message send the complainant against inconvenience

                caused by Srilankan Airlines dated. 21.05.2014.

 Ext.A5   - Photo copy of e mail message send the complainant against inconvenience

                caused by Srilankan Airlines dated. 31.05.2014.

Ext.A6 -  Photo copy of E mail message of Tender of apology issued by Subodani

`             Weerarathna (Indika), Customer Affairs Supervisor, Srilankan Airlines send

                to  the complainant dated. 16.06.2014

Ext.A7 -  Certificate issued by 4^th opposite party stating that the Visa Stamping of the

               Complainant Saudi Re-Entry Visa bearing Passport No. G0929712 dated.

              24.03.2014  

Ext.X1  series -  Settled reply given by Postal Department, Palakkad dated. 27.03.2017

Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties

Nil

Witness examined on the side of complainant

Nil

Witness examined on the side of opposite party

Cost   

          Rs. 10,000/-