Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/193/2018

Smt Sathvinder Kour c o late karnal singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri.Nagendra,owner Sneha Travels - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.Thippeswamy.N

02 May 2019

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:04/10/2018

DISPOSED      ON:02/05/2019

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

CC.NO:193/2018

 

DATED: 2^nd MAY 2019

PRESENT :-     SRI.T.N.SREENIVASAIAH :   PRESIDENT                                     B.A., LL.B.,

                        SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,                LADY MEMBER

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	1. Smt Sathvinder Kour c o late karnal singh aged about 62 years. Garments and daba owner,challkere tollgate, Chitradurga. Power of Attorny Sri Lakshmindar Singh, Advocate 2. Smt Jasvir Kour c o Manjindersingh, Bahumal village,dilva taluk, Kapurthal District, Punjab.   3. Kumar Adarsh Singh, S/o manjinder singh, Bamuvala village,dilva Taluk, Kapurthala dist,Punjab   (Rep by Sri.Thippeswamy. N, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. Sri.Nagendra,owner Sneha Travels, Gayathri Complex,Gayathri circle,VP Extension,Chitradurga.   2. Air Asia India Ltd.,  Manager Kempegowda  International airport,Ground Floor, Alpha3 Building, Devenahally, Bangalore-560300. (Rep by Sri.C.M. Veeranna, Advocate for OP No.1 and Smt. T.K. Champa, Advocate for OP No.2)

 

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to return back the amount paid towards air ticket and to pay a sum of Rs.15,61,349/- towards compensation/damages, mental agony, costs and  to grant such other reliefs.

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, 01.09.2018, the complainants have booked three Air Tickets from Air Asia Flight of Flight No.151628 by paying a sum of Rs.11,349/- for the purpose of going to Amruthsar from Bangalore to on 17.09.2018 to take medical treatment of complainant No.1 on 18.09.2018 at 11-00 AM and also to attend the meeting of Garments business to be held on 18.09.2018 at 4-00 PM.  It is further submitted that, on 15.09.2018 at about 1-18 PM, the complainants have received a message from OP No.2 through e-mail stating that, the flight booked by the complainants has been cancelled due to technical problem.  Due to cancellation of the flight, the complainants have put to great hardship and mental agony, which cannot be compensated by the OPs.  Further the complainant No.1 is aged about 62 years, for her treatment, she has taken appointment from the Fortis Hospital Doctor of Amrutsar.  Due to sudden cancellation of the flight, the complainant No.1 lost her opportunity to take treatment from the said Hospital.  Further the OP No.2 has accommodated the flight on 18.09.2018 without collecting any flight charges from the complainants.  Due to non-accommodation of the flight on 17.09.2018, the old aged complainant No.1 has lost the opportunity to take treatment with the Doctor of Fortis Hospital, Amrutsar, who came from Foreign Country, which caused great loss and mental agony, which is a deficiency of service on the part of OPs and hence, prayed for allow the complaint.

3.      On service of notice, OP No.1 appeared through Sri. C.M. Veeranna, Advocate and OP No.2 appeared through Smt. T.K. Champa, Advocate and filed their respective versions denying all the allegations made in the complaint. 

According to the version filed by the OP No.1, it is admitted that, the complainants have reserved three Air Tickets to travel from Bangalore to Amrutsar to take treatment for complainant No.1 at Amrutsar and also to attend business meeting by paying an amount of Rs.11,349/-.  The OP No.1 has made reservation after receipt of aviation charges and informed the complainants to scheduled travel on 17.09.2018 in Air Asia Flight No.151628.  Further the allegations made in para 3 are denied as false and the complainants are not coming under the purview of C.P Act, 1986.  The OP No.1 is not the service provider, he is only a booking agent.  The allegations made in para 4 to 9 are denied as false.  Further it is stated that, the OP No.1 is the booking agent for travelling through Bus, Air and acting on behalf of OP No.2.  The OP No.1 is not liable to pay any compensation if this Forum comes to the conclusion to pay award compensation to the complainants and the complainants are not entitled for any benefit from the OP No.1 and hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

According to the version filed by the OP No.2, it is admitted that, the complainants have booked the Air tickets on 01.09.2018 by paying an amount of Rs.11,349/- to go to Amrutsar from Bangalore for their urgent work.  It is stated that, the complainants were to be going to Amrutsar to get the medical treatment to complainant No.1 and also to attend the meeting of Garments business is denied as false and the complainants are put to strict proof of the same.  The other allegations made in para 4 to 1o are denied as false.  It is further stated that, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.  No doubt, the complainants are the consumers under the OP No.2 but, this Forum has no right to decide this case and on this ground alone, the complaint filed by the complainants is liable to be dismissed.  It is further submitted that, it is true that, the complainants have booked the Air tickets from OP No.1 on 01.09.2018 to travel from Bangalore to Amrutsar on 17.09.2018 by paying an amount of Rs.11,349/- .  Due to technical problem in the flight, the flight was cancelled on that day and the same has been informed to the complainants on 15.09.2018 at about 1-19 PM and on the next day i.e., on 18.09.2018, the OP No.2 has accommodate the complainants to travel from Bangalore to Amrutsar.  On 18.09.2018, the complainants have travelled in the flight from Bangalore to Amrutsar.  Due to technical problem in the flight, the OP No.2 has cancelled the flight and if the flight was departure on 17.09.2018, there will be a chance of collapsing the flight that’s why, the OP No.2 has cancelled the flight to safeguard the human being and therefore, there is no deficiency of service on the part of OP No.2 and hence, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.      On behalf of complainants, the PA Holder of complainant No.1 himself has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-7 were got marked and closed their side.  On behalf of OP No.1, one Sri Nagendra, the owner of Sneha Travels has examined as DW-1 and on behalf of OP No.2, one Sri. Deepak Mahindra, the Legal Officer of OP No.2 has examined as DW-2 and no documents have been produced and closed their side.

 

5.      Arguments heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

(1)  Whether the complainants prove that, due non accommodation of the flight on 17.09.2018 by the OP No.2, the complainants have suffered lot and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (2) What order?

         7.       Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

                    Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative. 

                    Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.      Point No.1:- There is no dispute between the parties that, on 01.09.2018, the complainants have booked three Air Tickets from OP No.2 through OP No.1 by paying an amount of Rs.11,349/-in Flight No.151628 to go to Amrutsar from Bangalore.  Due to technical problem in the Flight, the Flight was cancelled and the same has been informed to the complainants on 15.09.2018.  Further the OP No.2 has accommodated the complainants to travel from Bangalore to Amrutsar on 18.09.2018.  The Advocate for the complainant addressed his arguments that, due to non accommodation of the flight on 17.09.2018, the complainant No.1 has lost her opportunity to take treatment from the Foreign Doctor, which caused great loss and inconvenience because she has taken appointment from the Doctors ob 17.08.2018 for treatment and also there was a business meeting with the Garments Dealer at 4-00 PM on 17.09.2018.  Due to cancellation of the Flight, the complainants have suffered heavy loss.  It is argued by the Advocate for OP No.1 that, the OP No.1 is only a booking agent, he has received the amount from the complainants and the same has been sent to OP No.2, he is doing the work under commission basis, therefore, the OP No.1 has not committed any deficiency of service and the complaint is liable to be dismissed against OP No.1.  The Advocate for OP No.2 addressed the arguments that, due to technical problem in the Flight, the Flight was cancelled on 17.09.2018, but on 18.09.2018, the same has been accommodated to the complainants to travel from Bangalore to Amrutsar.  But the main contention of the complainants is that, the appointment of the Doctor has been taken for taking treatment to complainant No.1 was on 17.09.2018 and there was also a business meeting with the Garments Dealers on the same day at 4-00 PM.  Due to cancellation of the Flight, the complainants have suffered a lot.  The OP No.2 has sent a message to the complainants through e-mail on 15.09.2018 stating that, the Flight was cancelled due to technical problem on 17.09.2018 and the same will be accommodate on 18.09.2018.  The complainants have relied on the Civil Aviation Requirements Section 3 – Air Transport Series “M”, Part-IV, Issue I, wherein Section 3.3 states that;

3.3: Cancellation of Flight

3.3.1:  In order to reduce inconvenience caused to the passengers as a result of the cancellations of the flights on which they are booked to travel, airline shall inform the passenger of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled time of departure and arrange alternate flight/refund as acceptable to the passenger.  In case the passengers are informed of the cancellation less than two weeks before and up to 24 hours of the scheduled time of departure, the airline shall offer an alternate flight or refund the ticket, as acceptable to the passenger. 

3.3.2:  Passengers who have not been informed as per the provisions contained in para 3.3.1, or missed the connecting flight booked on the same ticket number of an airline, the airlines shall either provide alternate flight as acceptable to the passenger or provide compensation in addition to the full refund of air ticket in accordance with the following provisions:

a) INR 5,000 or booked one-way basic fare plus airline fuel charge, whichever is less for flights having a block time of up to and including 01 hour.

b) INR 7,500 or booked one-way basic fare plus airline fuel charge, whichever is less for flights having a block time of more than 01 hour and up to and including 02 hours.

c) INR 10,000 or booked one-way basic fare plus airline fuel charge, whichever is less for flights having a block time of more than 0 hours.

 

The complainants have also relied upon a decision reported in 2015(4)CLT in the case of Air India Ltd., Vs Kasturi Mani and others wherein it has been held that:

Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(g) – Airlines – Flight was cancelled due to technical reasons – OP provided five star hotel accommodation and food to the complainants – Delay in re-scheduled return flight – Held – Time is valuable for any person – Compensation of Rs.10,000/- - awarded to each complainant, keeping in view that accommodation provided to complainants by OP till their departure.

 

The return flight was scheduled to start at 9-15 PM on 27.12.2003.  It is alleged in the complaint that they had received telephonic message on 27.12.2003 from the officials of the OP intimating that the return flight was cancelled and was rescheduled on the next date that is on 28.12.2003 at 6-00 AM.  The reason for cancellation is known to the OP only. The complainants were asked to report at the airport at 4 AM on 28.12.2003.  The complainants were staying in their hotel which was 35 KMs away from the airport terminal.  Hence though it was difficult, the complainants reached the airport terminal on time. 

 

Another decision reported in 2018(1) CPR 62 (NC) in the case of Thai Airways International Public Co. Ltd., Vs. Subbaiah Koneru and others wherein it has been held as under:

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 15, 17, 19 and 21 – Airlines – Deficiency in service – Airlines failed to inform complainants well in advance regarding prevailing situation in Bangkok about non-operation of flights resulting in a lot of inconvenience and harassment to passengers – Complainants could not proceed with their further schedule due to lack of cooperation on part of OP.1 – Vide impugned order, State Commission allowed appeal partly and modified order of District Forum, holding that besides payment of refund of fare of balance part of journey, OPs shall pay sum of Rs.50,000/- to each complainants along with cost of Rs.3,000/- -Minimum facility expected from OP Airlines was to maintain an effective communication with their own passengers on minute-to-minute basis and try to make them comfortable in every possible manner, under given circumstances – They should have made arrangements for their hotel accommodation and also provide them necessary transport facilities – As per circular dated 06.08.2010 of DGCA, in case of delay in flights beyond 24 hours, hotel accommodation with meals etc, should be provided to passengers – Even if delay was due to reasons beyond control of Airlines, they could not have avoided their responsibility towards passengers who were stranded at airport due to law and order problem and there was a risk to their security as well – State Commission passed impugned orders as per which a sum of Rs.50,000/- has been orders to be provided to each of complainants in addition to refund of air fare of balance journey – Since Complainants have not challenged the order by way of any further appeal/revision petition, there is no reason to enhance amount of compensation allowed by State Commission – Revision Petition dismissed.        

 

 

9.      We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainants.  It clearly goes to show that, the complainants have booked the Air tickets on 01.09.2018 to travel from Bangalore to Amrutsar on 17.09.2018 by paying an amount of Rs.11,349/- in Flight No.151628, the same has been admitted by the OPs.  The main contention of the OP No.2 that, due to technical problem, the Flight was cancelled on 17.09.2018, the same has been intimated to the complainants ON 15.09.2018 at about 1-18 PM through e-mail.  But the allegation of the complainants is that, the complainant No.1 is old aged, she was intend to travel from Bangalore to Amrutsar for taking treatment from the Foreign Doctor on 17.09.2018 at Amrutsar Fortis Hospital..  To show the same, the complainants have produced Ex.A-5 which shows that, the complainant No.1 is taking treatment in the Fortis Hospital, Amrutsar.  Due to cancellation of the Flight, she was unable to take treatment, which caused great loss and inconvenience for taking treatment.  The complainants were also having business meeting with the Garments Dealers at Amrutsar, due to cancellation of the Flight, they have lost their opportunity to attend the same, which also caused great loss and inconvenience to them, the same amounts to deficiency of service on the part of OP No.2.  The OP No.1 is only a booking agent, it has booked the air tickets of the complainants to travel from Bangalore to Amrutsar on commission basis in Flight No.151628 on 17.09.2018.  Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed against OP No.1 as there is no deficiency of service on the part of OP No.1.   Viewed from any angle, we find deficiency in service on the part of OP.2.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.          

            10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is ordered that the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainants as compensation towards loss and inconvenience for not consulting the Foreign Doctor for taking treatment to complainant No.1 and for not attending the meeting with the Garments Dealer along with interest @ 9% p.a from 17.09.2018 till realization.

It is further ordered that, the OP No.2 is hereby directed to pay Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of this proceedings.

Complaint filed as against OP No.1 is hereby dismissed.

It is further ordered that, the OP No.2 is hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

(This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 2/05/2019 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures) 

 

                                     

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Sri. Lakvindar Singh, the PA Holder by way of affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

DW-1:- Sri.Nagendra, Proprietor of OP No.1 by way of affidavit evidence.

DW-2:- Sri. Deepak Mahindra, the Legal Officer of OP No.2 by way of affidavit evidence.

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	GPA
02	Ex-A-2:-	Air Ticket
03	Ex-A-3:-	Booking Details
04	Ex-A-4:-	DL
05	Ex-A-5:-	Receipt
06	Ex-A-6 & 7:-	e-mail details

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

-Nil-

 

 

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

Rhr**