KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. APPEAL No. 292/2010 JUDGMENT DATED:25-06-2010 PRESENT: JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT 1. M/s Air India, Erott Centre, Bank Road, Kozhikode. 2. The Managing Director, M/s Air India, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021. : APPELLANTS 3. The Managing Director, M/s Air India Express, Air India Building, Nariman point, Mumbai-400 021. (By Adv:M/s Menon & Pai) Vs. Tomy Mathew, S/o Mathew, Elements, Customs Road, : RESPONDENT Kozhikode – 673 032. JUDGMENT JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT The appellants are the opposite parties/Air India Authorities in CC.79/06 in the file of CDRF, Kozhikkode. The appellants are under orders to pay Rs.13,366/- that the complainant had to spent for buying air ticket in another Airline, to refund ticket amount of Rs.8384/- and compensation of Rs.10,000/- and cost of Rs.1000/-. 2. The case of the complainant is that he had booked 4 air tickets in Air India Express flight from Mumbai to Kozhikode on 29-12-2005. On the above day he reached the Mumbai International Airport to board the Flight but found that the flight had gone on the previous day itself. No intimation was given to the complainant and his family and hence they were stranded at Mumbai airport. The opposite parties did not make any alternative arrangements. They were also not accommodated in any other flights of the opposite parties. The ticket amount was also not refunded. The complainant had to borrow money to buy 4 tickets in Jet Airways spending an amount of Rs.21,750/-. Alleging deficiency of service he has sought for compensation and refund of the ticket amount. 3. The opposite parties 1 and 2, the Air India Authorities have filed version contending that they have nothing to do with the function of Air India Express and that they are unnecessary parties. 4. 3rd Opposite parties/Air India Express Authorities have filed version contending that the re-scheduling of the flight was intimated. The re-scheduling was done on 27/12/2005. It is mentioned in the ticket itself that the Air India Express had the right to cancel the flight and carry the passengers in other flights of the same sector provided space is available or refund the ticket amount. The ticket can be refunded only at the point of purchase of tickets. It is pointed out that it is at much cheaper rate the flight has been provided. They have disclaimed liability and denied deficiency of service. 5. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1, RW1 Exts.A1 to A3 and B1 and B2. 6. On a perusal of the judgment of the Forum we find that the Forum was convinced as to the difficulties faced by the complainant and his family consisting of wife and 2 minor daughters who had to spent time at the Mumbai Airport and look for alternative arrangements. The case of PW1 that the opposite parties did not provide any help to accommodate them in any other flights of the same day and that they refused to refund the ticket amount was not disputed. The evidence of PW1 that they were not intimated the re-scheduling of the flight was relied in the absence of any objective evidence as to the intimation. The flight was pre-poned. No particulars as to the above pre-ponement of the flight have been produced. The Flight of the petitioner and his family in the absence of intimation as to the cancellation is only to be presumed. Refusal to refund the ticket amount on technical grounds cannot also be approved. We find that there is no patent illegality in the order of the Forum. There is no scope for admitting the appeal. In the result the appeal is dismissed in-limine. The office will forward the copy of this order to the Forum. JUSTICE K.R. UDAYABHANU: PRESIDENT VL. | 
