SRI.K. VIJAYAKUMARAN, PRESIDENT. The complaint is for realization of compensation etc. The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows: The complainant’s husband is working at Dubai. As she wanted to reside with her husband she has reserved tickets in Flight No.A1 981 for onward journey on 7.9.2005 from Thiruvananthapuram to Dubai and return journey in Flight No A1 980 on 17.9.2005. The booking was done through the first opp.party. The required sum of Rs.23,400/- was paid by the complainant towards reservation charges for the tickets. The sum of Rs.20,000/- was paid on 30.8.2005 and the balance amount of Rs.3,400/- was paid on 5.9.2005. The 2nd opp.party has reserved the tickets of the complainant . The ticket for the journey from Trivandrum to Dubai was booked in the business class while for the return journey the ticket was booked in the economy class. Though the complainant had booked a confirmed ticket in the business class she was given accommodation only in the economy class for the journey from Thiruvananthapuram to Dubai. The business class is a costlier and comfortable class whereas economy class is a cheaper and inconvenient class. Since the complainant was given accommodation in the economy class her journey to Dubai was uncomfortable and inconvenient and she had to adjust in a congested space causing bodily discomfort and uneasiness and her physical condition was adversely affected. Consequently she could not enjoy her stay. The illegal act of the opp.parties caused much mental agony and pain to the complainant. The services of the opp.parties have suffered from deficiency. Hence the complaint. The first opp.party filed version contending interalia, that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts and is liable to be dismissed in limine. The 1st opp.party is unnecessarily made a party in this complaint. There was no specific averment of deficiency in service as against this opp.party. The complainant had booked to and fro ticket in Air India flight through this opp.party. The total mount collected from the complainant is Rs.23,400/- . The tickets were issued through M/s. Akbar Travels, Trivandrum This opp.party deny that the ticket for the journey from Trivandrum to Dubai was booked in the business class. The com plainant’s father-in-law Mr. Hameed Kunju had approached this opp.party for the purchase of an air ticket of the 2nd opp.party. This opp.party delivered the same. The role of the opp.party comes to an end there and rest of the service should have been done by the 2nd opp.party. It is the 2nd opp.party who issues boarding pass and this opp.party has no role to play therein. This opp.party is not liable to pay any compensation for the alleged deficiency of service. This opp.party has rendered proper service to the complainant which is obvious from the fact that the complainant and her family are having tickets reserved through this opp.party even now. This complaint is a frivolous one and hence this opp.party prays to dismiss the same with compensatory costs. The 2nd opp.party filed a separate version contending, interalia, that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. M/s. Air India has got only 2 categories of seats in its Aircrafts viz. Executive class and the Economy class. The rate fare charged for the executive class is substantially higher than the economy class. There is no category called the business class . The executive class form a totally partitioned and separated area in the aircraft. The air fare for Trivandrum to Dubai and return journey including tax for the executive class is Rs.30,700/- The economy class is divided into 8 class/divisions for the purpose of booking ticket. They are W/Y/B/H/K/L/M/V respectively. The division is done for booking purpose and the passenger will be booked as per the availability of seats in each class. The air fare from Thiruvananthapuram to Dubai and the return journey from Dubai including tax for economy class is Rs.23,400/-. The complainant has paid only the faire for the economy class and she was duly booked in class B of economy class for her onward journey she was booked in class M of the economy class for the return journey. The complainant is entertaining a wrong notion that she has booked the ticket in the executive class. The airfare for the executive class is substantially higher than the air fare for the economy class. The averments in para 1 of the complaint are not true and hence denied. The complainant had booked ticket for her up and down journey by paying an amount of Rs.23,400/- in the economy class. The allegation is made due to misconception that B class is business class whereas there is no business class. The averments in para 2 of the complaint are not true and hence denied. The 2nd opp.party has not committed any deficiency in service and the complaint is liable to be dismissed with their costs. Points that would arise for consideration: 1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.parties? 2. Reliefs and costs. For the complainant PW.1 is examined. Ext. P1 to P5 were marked. For the opp.parties DW.1 and 2 were examined. Ext. D1 to D6 are marked. Points 1 and 2 As a matter of fact there is no dispute that the complainant has traveled to Dubai from Thiruvananthapuram on 7.9.2005 in Flight No.A1 981 and return journey performed on 17.9.2005 in flight No.A1 980. The complainant has no case that she was not provided with seat by opp.party 2but her grievance is that when she booked seat in executive class for the onward journey she was given accommodation only in economy class causing mental agony and harassment to her. According to the complainant in the ticket purchased by her for the onward journey it is specifically stated in the relevant column the letter class which indicates Business class which is the executive class. The definite contention of the 2nd opp.party is that there are only 2 classes of seats in their flights viz. executive class and economy class, that there is no business class, that the economy class is further classified into W/Y/B/H/K/L/M/V for booking purpose and that for the onward journey the complainant was booked under B division in economy class and return journey in M. According to the 2nd opp.party the complainant is mislead and on the wrong notion that class B is business class or executive class. Admittedly the complainant has paid Rs.23,400/- for the onward and return journeys. According to opp.party 2 the total fare in economy class during September 2005 for onward and return journeys was Rs.21,750/- plus tax of Rs.1650/- which comes to Rs.23,400/- and that the fare for the said journey in executive class would come to Rs.30,700/- ie. 29050/- + Tax Rs.1650/-. The case of the complainant that she purchased ticket for onward journey in executive class and return journey is economy class is not supported by any evidence or material produced. The learned counsel for opp.party would argue that if the case of the complainant is accepted she would have to pay Rs.25,900/- ie. Rs.14,525/- which is 50% the fare of executive class Rs.29050/- plus Rs.9625/- ie 50% of fare for economy class of Rs.19250/- plus tax Rs.1650/- and service charge Rs.100/- which is not the case herein. The complainant in our view failed to establish paid by her is for onward journey in executive class and return journey in economy class that the fare . PW.2 who dispute Ext. D6 has not produced any fare chart of any other Airways would establish that Rs.23,400/- is for a journey in executive class and return journey in economy class. There is no dispute that the complainant had traveled and fro paying Rs.23,400/- only. It is an admitted fact that the fair for executive class is comparatively higher than the economy class. Ext. D6 shows that the complainant could not have traveled in the executive class, because the fare for onward journey in the executive class and return journey in the economic class would come into Rs.25,900/- . The complainant has no case that she has paid any amount other than Rs.23,400/- In this context it is worth pointing out that the first opp.party in their version has categorically stated that the ticket for the complainant for onward journey was not issue in the executive class. When that is the position the burden is on the complainant to establish by cogent material that the word B in Ext.P2 and P4 is indicating executive class or business class which in our view the complainant failed to discharge . With regard to the inconvenience and hardship also there is no believable evidence. The actual complainant who traveled has not been examined to PW.1 is her father in law who is not competent state what are the bodily discomfort and uneasiness felt by her. On perusal of the entire evidence we are of the view that the complainant is under a wrong notion that her status as shown in Ext.P3 and P4 is business or executive class as contended by the opp.parties. We find that there is no deficiency on the part of the opp.parties. Points found accordingly. In the result the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. Dated this the 25th day of June, 2009.. . I N D E X List of witnesses for the complainant PW.1. – Hameed kunju List of documents for the complainant P1. – Receipt dated 30.8.2005 P2. – Receipt dated 5.9.2001 P3. – Flight details P4. – Booking status P5. – Copy of Air ticket List of witnesses for the opp.parties DW.1. – Prajesh Kumar.S DW.2. – Dileep kumar List of documents for the opp.p0arties D1. – Ticket D2. – Cash receipt D3. – Cash receipt D4. – Authorisation letter D5. – Authorisation letter D6. - D.G.C.A fair structure for the period of September 2005 | 
