DIST.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KHURDA, BHUBANESWAR:
-ooOoo-
C.D.CASE NO. 21/2011
Smt. Anuja Paul, aged about 50 years,
W/o Pradeep Kumar Paul, Resident of
Plot No.1062/18 and 19, Satabdi Nagar, Unit – 8,
PO/PS – Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar – 751003,
Dist – Khurda …. Complainant
-Vrs.-
Air India, Represented through its
Manager/ Director, having its Regional Office,
At – VII/C-8, Rajpath, City Office,
Near A.G. Square, Bhubaneswar,
Dist – Khurda …. Opp. Party
For the complainant : Sri K.C.Prusty & Others (Adv.)
For the O.Ps : M/s J.B.Pattnaik & Associates (Adv.)
DATE OF FILING : 18/01/2011
DATE OF ORDER : 26/09/2022
ORDER
K.C.RATH, PRESIDENT
1. This is an application U/s 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
2. The complainant’s case in brief is that, she had booked a ticket in Air India to travel from Delhi to Washington-Dulles. The Air India flight had to arrive at Newyork first and then to travel to Washington-Dulles. But after arrival of the flight at Newyork, the OP cancelled the flight to Washington-Dulles and instead thereof, handed over the boarding ticket to the complainant to travel to Washington Reagan. Accordingly, the complainant travelled in the Delta flight to Washington Reagan where from she travelled to Washington Dulles by private arrangement. Further the complainant had booked a ticket in the Air India to return from Washington-Dulles to Delhi. She travelled by Delta flight from Washington Reagan to Newyork but she arrived at Newyork after a delay of one hour by which time, the door of Air India flight to Delhi was closed. The OP arranged for the complainant to travel by Air India flight from Newyork to Bombay where from she travelled to Delhi. As alleged by the complainant, the inconvenience faced by her was due to deficiency in service of the OP. Hence this complaint.
3. On the other hand, the OP filed the written version, particularly contending therein that, as per rules governing Air India, the carrier has the right to change the schedule of departure of the flights or re-route the same without incurring any liability thereon. It is further pleaded by the OP that, when the Air India flight arrived at Newyork, they handed over the boarding pass ticket in Delta flight to the complainant to travel to Washington Reagan. She could have objected at that time but she did not raise any objection . So far as the return ticket is concerned, it is alleged that as the Delta flight arrived at Newyork after a delay of one hour, the Air India flight scheduled to Delhi was not available for her, for which, the OP arranged for the complainant to travel by Air India from Newyork to Bombay. As there is no deficiency in service, the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.
4 Perused the materials on record. The facts admitted are that, the complainant had booked a ticket in Air India to travel from Delhi to Washington – Dulles and that flight reached Newyork and thereafter the OP cancelled their flight to Washington – Dulles and handed over a boarding pass to the complainant to travel to Washington – Reagan by Delta flight. The complainant travelled by Delta flight to Washington – Reagan where from she travelled from Washington – Dulles by private arrangement. So far as the return ticket is concerned, since the Delta flight arrived at Newyork after a delay of one hour, she could not avail the Air India flight to Delhi. Instead thereof, the OP arranged for the complainant to travel from Newyork to Bombay. In the second case, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP. However, in the first case, where the complainant had to travel from Newyork to Washington Reagan instead of Washington Dulles, she faced inconvenience and it certainly amounts to deficiency in service. As such, the complaint bears merit. Hence it is ordered.
ORDER
The complaint is hereby allowed on contest against the OP. The OP is hereby directed to pay an amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) only, to the complainant towards compensation for inconvenience faced by her in travelling from Newyork to Washington-Dulles. The OP is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) only towards mental agony suffered by the complainant and a further sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only towards litigation expenses. The order be complied with by the OP within a period of thirty days from the date of communication of this order, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to execute the order against the OP in accordance with law.
The order is pronounced on this day the 26th September, 2022 under the seal & signature of the President and Member (W) of the Commission.
(K.C.RATH)
PRESIDENT
Dictated & corrected by me
President
I agree
(S.Tripathy)
Member (W)
Transcribed by Smt. M.Kanungo, Sr.Steno
