IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 31st day of March, 2016
Filed on 17.06.2011
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George, President
2. Sri. Antony Xavier, Member
3. Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
C.C.No.206/2011
between
Complainant:- Opposite Parties:-
Sri. George Samuel 1. The Proprietor, Care Ways
Vaniyamparambil Travels, Mitchel Junction
Mattom South Muri Mavelikara
Kannamangalam Village (By Adv. M. Raghavan Nair)
Thattarambalam P.O.
Mavelikara 2. The Proprietor, M/s. Riya
Represented by the Power of Attorney Travels and Tours, Tears Towers
Holder Ravi, S/o Velayudhan Sasthamangalam
Poroor Thekkethil, Kandiyoor Muri Thiruvananthapuram – 695 010 Mavelikara Village (By Adv. P. Roy)
(By Adv. P.V. Santhoshkumar)
3. The Manager, Air India
Thiruvananthapuram
O R D E R
ANTONY XAVIER (MEMBER)
This is a remanded matter. The case was once heard and the President of the then Forum passed an order on 29.02.2012 allowing the complaint. Since there was no detailed order, Hon’ble State Commission suomoto taken up the matter and remanded the case for hearing for the purpose of passing a speaking order. After remanded, notices were issued to both parties for hearing the matter.
2. The complainant’s case in a nutshell is as follows:-
The complainant purchased air tickets for the purpose of travelling with his wife in Air India Flight to and from Thiruvananthapuram and Vishakhapattanam from the opposite parties. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.38,800/- for the tickets. The complainant availed sufficient tickets from the second opposite party through the first opposite party. Both the said opposite parties operate for and on behalf of the third opposite party. According to the tickets provided to the complainant, the complainant and his wife on 29th December 2008 had to travel first of all from Thiruvananthapuram to Chennai and in opposite parties another flight from Chennai they had to reach their destination Vishakhapattanam. Similar was the case with the return journey. On 30th December 2012, the complainant and his spouse would board the flight from Vishakhapattanam to Chennai, and from there in another flight they could reach Thiruvananthapuram. On 29th December 2008, the complainant and his spouse reached Chennai in the opposite parties’ flight. When they reached Chennai, the connected flight to Vishakhapattanam was not available. The complainant was forced to travel in other party’s flight on paying further charges. The complainant and his wife met worse plight on their return journey on 30th December 2008 from Vishakhapattanam. They missed both the flights, viz. from Vishakhapattanam to Chennai, and from Chennai to Thiruvananthapuram. The complainant has to stay back in Chennai for a day to catch the other flight. The complainant sustained both monetary and mental injury. The complainant caused to send a legal notice to the opposite parties calling upon him to effect payment of the ticket charge. The opposite parties till date did not make any useful response. The opposite parties committed deficiency of service. Got aggrieved on this, the complainant approached this Forum for compensation and relief.
2. On notices being served the opposite parties appeared and filed separate versions. The contention of the first opposite party is that there was no delay or cancellation of the flights as the complainant alleged. The flights were missed consequent upon the complainant’s belated appearance on the boarding counter. Even if ad there been any delay or deletion of the flights, the complainant ought to have get the same endorsed in the concerned tickets by the third opposite party. According to the first opposite party, the complaint is to be dismissed with cost. According to the second opposite party, there exists no agency relationship with any of the opposite parties. The delay of the flights if any occasioned, the second opposite party could not be held responsible. The delay is due to the internal matters of the third opposite party. The third opposite party contends that the flights got delayed both by engineering pitfalls and bad weather. The intimation as to the said aspect has duly communicated to the complainant and to the second opposite party. The complainant was also given the choice of availing refund of the full fare the complainant paid. The third opposite party had approved the refund of the charges of the unutilized flight. The third opposite party is not responsible for the acts of the other opposite parties. The complaint is liable to be dismissed, the opposite parties contend.
3. The complainant’s evidence consists of the testimony of the Power of Attorney Holder of the complainant examined as PW1 and the documents were marked as Exts.A1 toA17. On the side of the opposite parties, the Station Manager of the third opposite party was examined.
4. Bearing in mind the contentions of the parties, the questions that come up before us for consideration are:-
1) Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
2) Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief sought for?
5. We carefully went through the complaint, version, affidavits and other materials placed on record by the parties. Concededly the complainant purchased tickets for the purpose of travelling from Thiruvananthapuram to Vishakhapattanam and vice versa. According to the complainant, the complainant and his wife despite having purchased the sufficient tickets for the to and fro journey from the opposite parties, they were made to avail the opposite party’s service only from Trivandrum to Chennai. For all the other instances, the complainant and his wife were constrained to catch other flights paying more amount as fare charges. Holding the complainant’s contentions lively in mind, we meticulously perused the materials brought on record before us by the parties. According to the first opposite party all the mess ups and flights missing were due to the complainant’s delayed turning up on the boarding counter. According to the first opposite party the flights were delayed nor cancelled. The second opposite party contends that there is no agent relationship between the opposite parties and the flight delay or cancellation was owing to the third opposite party’s internal matters. According to the third opposite party, the flights were either delayed or cancelled for the reasons beyond their control. The inclement weather and the engineering fault caused the disorder. On a plain perusal of the entire materials itself, it appears that the flights were either cancelled or delayed as has been alleged by the complainant. It is also crucial to notice that seemingly the contentions of the opposite parties stand incongruous each other. An attempt is visibly seen on each opposite party’s part to blame each other in order to shirk away from their responsibility to provide prompt and fair service to their customers. In this context the contention of the opposite parties that they have no link or connection with whatsoever happened to the complainant will not hold water. The contentions put forth by the opposite parties are inconsequential, and do not merit acceptance. The said are too feeble and incapable of in any way taking away the liability of the opposite parties towards the complainant. We are of the strong view that the service of the opposite parties is deficient. We need hardly say, the complainant is entitled to relief.
For the forgoing facts and findings emerged herein above, the opposite parties are directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.38,800/- (Rupees thirty eight thousand and eight hundred only) the cost of the ticket with 8% interest per annum from the date of filing this complaint till its recovery. The second opposite party is directed to pay a compensation of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to the complainant. The opposite parties shall comply with the order of this Forum within 30 days of receipt of the same.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of March, 2016.
Sd/- Sri.Antony Xavier (Member) :
Sd/- Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine. D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Ravi (Witness)
Ext.A1 series - Electronic ticket receipts (4 Nos.) dated 19.12.2008
Ext.A2 series - Electronic ticket receipts (4 Nos.) dated 20.12.2008
Ext.A3 series - Boarding pass (4 Nos.) dated 30.12.2008
Ext.A4 series - Boarding pass (2 Nos.) dated 29.12.2008
Ext.A5 series - Duplicate ITR (2 Nos.)
Ext.A6 series - e Ticket Itinerary / Receipt (2 Nos.)
Ext.A7 - Receipt No. 2056832
Ext.A8 - Receipt No.6932719
Ext.A9 - Receipt No.69213
Ext.A10 - Receipt of Care Ways Travels dated 19.12.2008
Ext.A11 - Email message – refund of the tickets
Ext.A12 - Copy of the legal notice dated 18.6.2009
Ext.A13 series - Postal receipts (3 Nos.)
Ext.A14 series - Acknowledgement cards (3 Nos.)
Ext.A15 - Copy of the reply notice dated 24.7.2009
Ext.A16 - Letter dated 7.7.2009
Ext.A17 - Power of Attorney
Evidence of the opposite parties:- Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite parties/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
