BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ERNAKULAM.

                                   Dated this the 6^th day of April 2018

                                                                             Filed on : 18.04.2017

PRESENT:

Shri. Cherian K. Kuriakose,                                President.

 Shri. Sheen Jose,                                               Member

 Smt. Beena Kumari V.K.                                    Member.

                            CC.No.150/2017

                                  Between       

O R D E R

Beena Kumari V.K.   Member 

1)     A brief statement of facts of this complaint is as stated below:

         The 1^st complainant is an Advocate practising before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala and also an accredited Mediator.  The 2^nd complainant is his wife and 3^rd complainant is his son, a final year B.Sc. Degree student at Cochin College in Ernakulam.  On 21.10.2016 complainants and two relatives had booked 5 flight tickets through
M/s. Travel Wonders, Kochi, for travelling from Kochi to Delhi and back, with the opposite parties.  The complainants had received confirmed tickets Nos.5891088188099 to 5891088188103 on the very same day.  An amount of Rs.54,800/- was paid as total airfare including surcharge and taxes, on 21.10.2016.  Journey was scheduled from Kochi to Delhi on 27.12.2016 (Jet Airways 9W911) and Delhi to Kochi on 02.01.2017 at 4.05 p.m which was scheduled to arrive at Kochi at 7.15 p.m on the same day.  The complaints flew to Delhi from Kochi as scheduled on 27.12.2016 under the above mentioned tickets. 

2)     After completion of our assigned task in Delhi, the complainants reached Delhi Airport for the return journey on 02.01.2017 around 12.30 p.m in the afternoon as the complainants had received a text message from the office of the 2^nd opposite party advising them to reach the airport at least two hours before the scheduled time.  The complainants entered the airport around 1.00 p.m and thereafter waited in the long queue of Jet Airways counter.  When complainants reached the Jet Airways counter all their luggage were tagged and sent through the rollers and boarding passes were also served on the complainants.  Suddenly the personnel at the counter received a phone call and he ordered to stop the rollers and sent a man to bring back the luggage and collected back the boarding passes from the complainants.  Then the luggage were kept aside and complainants were told to stand aside for some time.  The complainants approached the supervisors counter.  A lady supervisor in that counter vehemently told the complainants that the flight is overbooked so complainants cannot travel in that flight and directed to wait there for alternate arrangements which will be informed later.  Though the complainants earnestly pleaded to the supervisors for their entry in the scheduled flight, the supervisor was adamant on her decisions and stated that the flight is overbooked and she cannot do anything.  The complainants who could not even had their noon meal as they had reported around 12.30  p.m, had to wait in the lobby without food and water with high mental tension and strain due to the uncertainty of the alternate arrangements to be arranged by the 2^nd opposite party.  The 1^st complainant is an advocate and an accredited Mediator of the Kerala High Court and had some professional engagements on 03.01.2017, the opening date of Court after Christmas vacation and was very much tensed and worried about the unexpected denial of the return journey at the last minute, which was booked and confirmed two months back and the 3^rd complainant who is  a final year B.Sc Degree student at Cochin College in Ernakulam had to attend the practical exams and regular classes on 03.01.2017, the re-opening day after Christmas vacation had suffered high mental tension and strain due to the uncertainty of travel and waiting without food and water.  The 2^nd complainant also suffered high mental tension and strain due to the last minute denial of journey and waiting in the lobby without food and water.  The complainants categorically deliberated the acute necessity of going by the scheduled flight and the consequences of delay in reaching their destination will affect their profession and reputation.  But the person at counter was adamant and was not heeding to the polite requests of the complainants.  The complainants waited in airport lobby without any food and water till 9.45 p.m. on 02.01.2017 for alternate arrangements made by the 2^nd opposite party with connection flight to Mumbai, which arrived at Mumbai around 11.00 p.m.  The next connection flight from Mumbai to Kochi was scheduled at 6.40 a.m on 03.01.2017.  The complainants had waited throughout night in single chairs at Mumbai airport.  The complainants had to suffer terrifying ordeal due to the opposite party’s irresponsible, illegal, immoral and inhuman acts.  Therefore the opposite parties are liable to compensate the complainants for the painful and horrible sufferings on account of their illegal, unethical and inhuman conducts by informing the confirmed ticket holders to reach at airport at least two hours before the scheduled departure time, knowing well that the passengers cannot board in the flight due to over booking.  The above acts on the part of the opposite parties is malafide, illegal and fraudulent with a view to make illegal gain and caused loss, sufferings, mental worry and hardship to complainants.  The opposite parties action by denying complainants boarding in the scheduled flight at the last minute despite the fact that the complainants had valid confirmed tickets and had reported at the proper check-in time amounted to unethical, unscrupulous and illegal trade practice.  The opposite parties had arranged certain other passengers in the last minute after accepting exorbitant fares and had allotted the seats to those passengers.  This tactics adopted by the opposite parties was intended to get more monetary gain which is illegal, and unfair trade practice hence complainants are entitled for rightful compensation for their night marsh sufferings on 02.01.2017 night in the Delhi Airport and Mumbai Airport due to the last minutes denial of boarding in the scheduled flight. It is submitted that the opposite parties have indulged in unfair trade practice in denying the journey at the last minute after issuing confirmed ticket by accepting full amount towards air tickets well in advance.  The complainants therefore filed this complaint seeking directions from this Forum to the opposite parties to any compensation of Rs.6 lakh towards the mental and physical agony, financial loss and professional setbacks, suffered by the complainants and also towards the deficiency in service. They also sought for an amount of Rs.3 lakhs as compensation for the delay caused to the non-admission in the scheduled flight and to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant as the costs of this proceedings.

3)     Notices were issued to the opposite parties from this Forum.  The 2^nd opposite party appeared before this Forum through their Counsel and filed their version on 02.06.2017.  The 1^st opposite party did not appear before this Forum despite receipt of the notice.  Hence the 1^st opposite party is set ex-parte.

4)     Version of the 2^nd opposite party.

        The 2^nd opposite party – Jet Airways (India) Ltd. submitted that this consumer complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts of the case against the 2^nd opposite party since this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain this consumer complaint.  The cause of action is admittedly at New Delhi where allegedly the boarding has been denied to the complainants. Hence this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain this consumer complaint. The averments that the 1^st    complainant is a practicing advocate before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala and that he is an accredited mediator are false and hence denied.  The further averment that the 3^rd complainant is final year B.Sc degree student is also false and denied by the opposite parties, that the practice of overbooking is followed by almost all the airlines worldwide as, each airline operates in a competitive environment.  The reason why this is done is that there are invariably some last minute cancellations as a result of which, an airline may have to carry vacant seats.  Based on an extensive trend analysis, airlines overbook flights to the extent that the number of overbooked passengers is equivalent to the experienced last minute cancellations ‘No shows’.  However on the day in question, this statistical mode did not work, which resulted in denying boarding to the last show passengers after the flight capacity of 168 seats.  168 passengers have checked in by 1.50 p.m on 02.01.2017.  Whereas the complainants have reported at 3 p.m by the time the flight capacity was full.  Hence opposite parties intimated the complainants that the flight capacity is full.  And immediately alternate arrangements were made at a very short interval to travel to Kochi via Mumbai which the complainants accepted without any dispute or regret.  The complainants accordingly travelled to Mumbai in flight No.9W 0362 on 02.01.2017 itself including complementary dinner served to them during the flight which was available to other passengers on cost.  At Mumbai Airport the complainants were given lounge accommodation in terminal 2 ground floor for stay with food and beverages without taking any extra charges from them.  Further the opposite parties have made arrangements for travel of the complainants from Mumbai to Kochi in Flight No.9W 0436 which departed at 6.20 am on 03.01.2017.  Hence the entire contrary allegations, complainants entered the airport around 1 pm, at the Jet airways counter luggage were tagged and send through rollers, boarding pass was issued, collected back the boarding passes from the complainant, complainants of inconvenience, not having the noon meal, reporting at 12.30 p.m waiting, mental agony, lack of facilities, first complainant had professional engagements on 03.01.2017 the 3^rd complainant had to attend the practical exams and regular classes on 03.01.2017 etc are absolutely false and stoutly denied by the opposite parties.  It is submitted that the opposite parties have allotted the seats on first come first serve basis.  Prior to the reporting of the complainants on 02.01.2017, 168 passengers were checked in and hence the complainants could not be accommodated.  Therefore the entire contrary allegations are absolutely false and hence denied by the opposite parties. The allegation that the conduct of the opposite parties amounted to unethical, unscrupulous and illegal trade practice is absolutely false and hence denied.  The averment of the complainant that the opposite parties have indulged in unfair trade practice is also equally false and hence denied.  It is contended that the complainants are not entitled to any of the reliefs prayed for in the consumer complaint.  The complaint is bereft of any bonafides and is liable to be dismissed with the cost of the opposite parties.  Hence in the facts and circumstances in the case this consumer complaint is only to be dismissed with cost of the opposite parties.

5)     The issues to be decided in this case are as follows:

1. Whether the 1^st complainant has proved any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the 1^st complainant is entitled to get Rs. 6 lakhs towards compensation for the opposite parties for the mental agony or inconveniences if any, suffered by the complainant?
3. Whether the 1^st complainant is entitled to get 3 lakh towards compensation for the delay caused due to the non-admission in the scheduled flight?

6)     The evidence in this case consisted of the oral evidence of the 1^st complainant as PW1 and through PW2 and the documentary evidences furnished by the complainant which were marked as Exbt.A1 to A10.  The 2^nd opposite party adduced oral evidence through their witness DW1 and authorization letter of the 2^nd opposite party was marked as Exbt.B1. The complainant and the Counsel for the 2^nd opposite party were heard on 03.03.2018.

7.   Issue Nos. (i) and (ii)

The complainants had booked flight tickets of the 2^nd opposite party- Jet Airways (India) Ltd. on 21.10.2016, for travelling from Kochi to Delhi on 27.12.2016 and for the return journey from Delhi to Kochi on 02.01.2017.  The flight tickets were booked through the 1^st opposite party – Travel wonders, Ravipuram, Ernakulam as evidenced by Exbt.A1 E ticket issued on 23.12.2016.  The 1^st complainant had paid Rs.54,800/- towards total Air fare for to and fro journey.  The e-ticket also showed the following itinerary.

          The cause of action arose when the complainants were denied boarding in the return flight of Jet Airways on 02.01.2017 from Delhi to Kochi.  The return tickets were booked from Ernkulam District through the 1^st opposite party Travel wonders therefore this Forum has ample jurisdiction to entertain this complaint.  The complainants were denied boarding in the return flight on 02.01.2017 on the ground that the flight was overbooked.  In this case the complainants were possessing confirmed ticket to travel from Delhi to Kochi on 02.01.2017 and the complainants were told that the entire 168 seats were occupied by 1.50 pm on 02.01.2017, for which no substantiating evidence was produced before this Forum by the 2^nd opposite party.  It is contended by the 2^nd opposite party in their version that the complainants had reached the Delhi Airport only at 3 pm.  No such contention raised by the 2^nd opposite party in their Exbt.A4 reply notice issued to the complainant.  Except for the averments in the version of the 2^nd opposite party, no reliable evidence produced by the 2^nd opposite party to prove the above contention.  The 1^st complainant submitted that he along with his wife and son had reached the Delhi Airport around 12.30 pm on 02.01.2017 and entered the queue of Jet Airways in front of the counter by 1 p.m and when the complainant reached the counter by 2 p.m all their luggage were tagged and sent through rollers and boarding passes were also issued to the complainants.  Suddenly on getting a phone call at the counter, the rollers were stopped and the complainants were directed to collect back their luggage and the complainants had to wait in the lobby till 9.30 p.m on 02.01.2017 without food and water for getting alternate arrangements by the 2^nd opposite party at 9.30 p.m to Mumbai and the complainants reached Mumbai at 11 p.m and it was on the next day ie. on 03.01.2017 the next connection flight was arranged which was scheduled to depart 7 A.M  on 03.01.2017.  It is contended that the act of last minute denial of boarding in the scheduled flight on 02.01.2017 despite having confirmed valid tickets amounted to gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the 2^nd opposite party.  Moreover, the 1^st complainant has filed his proof affidavit stating that he reached the Delhi Airport at 12.30 p.m along with 2 other women passengers whose flight were scheduled to deport at 2 pm and the complainants were in the queue in front of the counter from by 1 p.m on 02.01.2017 and they reached the counter by 2 pm.  We find no reason to discard the above sworn statement of the 1^st complainant.  It is pertinent to note that the boarding passes were also issued to the complainants and the denial of boarding occurred at the last minute after putting their luggage on the roller.  It was informed to the complainant that the denial of boarding was due to ‘overbooking’ and the flight capacity was full.  It is submitted by the 2^nd opposite party that the practice of overbooking is followed by almost all the airlines worldwide as each airline operates in a competitive environment.  We appreciate over booking to make good the loss due to last minute cancellation and no shows. Here the complainant filed this affidavit stating that the complainants reached the Delhi airport by 12.30 pm and entered the queue in front of the counter by 1 p.m and the complainants got the Exbt.A2 boarding passes also and the luggages tagged and put on the roller, thereafter the complainants were denied boarding.  We do not accept the deposition of DW2 since she had not produced her board pass dated 02.01.2017.  The 1^st complainant and his son and the 3^rd complainant had to reach Cochin urgently.  The fact that the 3^rd complainant – the son of the complainant is a final 7 year degree student as evidenced by the Exbt.A9 certificate issued by the Head of the Department of Chemistry, Cochin College.  Exbt. A10 is the copy of the Identity card of the 3^rd complainant issued by the Cochin College.  Exbt. A5 is the certificate of enrolment of the 1^st complainant.  Exbt.A6 is the copy of the certificate issued by Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee Supreme Court of India stating that the 1^st complainant had successfully mediated ten disputes under the supervision of an expert mediator.  Exbt.A7 is such another certificate of participation by the 1^st complainant at the mediation Training programme held at Bangalore.  Exbt. A8 certificate issued by High Court Advocates Association which reveals that his Bar Council Roll No. as K/79/1987 and that he was enrolled as an advocate on 22.02.1987.  Thus the urgency of the 1^st complainant and 3^rd complainant to reach Cochin on 02.01.2017 itself, is found believable and DW1, the witness of the 2^nd opposite party has no direct knowledge about the happenings in Delhi Airport since he is working as Manager-key accounts in Cochin Office.  Here the 2^nd opposite party denied boarding the complainants who were having confirmed return ticket for 2^nd January 2017 showing departure from 04.05.2017 from Delhi to Cochin. We find that the practice of denying boarding to the complainants who were possessing confirmed return tickets is definitely an unfair trade practice and deficiency in service committed by the 2^nd opposite party, as there was no cancellation of tickets by the complainants and there was no show of the complainants on the particular day scheduled for departure from Delhi.  The return tickets were booked early on 21.10.2016 after paying a total airfare of Rs.54,800/- through the 1^st opposite party – Travel wonders.  The complainants have sufficiently proved the deficient service offered and unfair trade practice committed by the 2^nd opposite party.  The complainants had to suffer a lot of inconvenience and mental agony due to the deficient service offered and unfair trade practice committed by the 2^nd opposite party, for which the 2^nd opposite party is liable to compensate the complainants.  We fix the compensation amount at Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakdh rupees) to be paid by the 2^nd opposite party to the 1^st complainant.

8.   Issue No.(iii)

          The third issue to be decided is whether the 1^st complainant is entitled to get 3 lakh rupees towards compensation for the delay caused due to the non-admission in the scheduled flight. 

The relief granted as above is sufficient to redress the grievance of the complainants.  Therefore no further relief towards compensation is granted.

5. Issue No. (iv)

The complainants have spent their valuable time and money to contest this case, for which they are entitled to get costs of Rs.10,000/-

6. In the result, the complainant is partly allowed and we direct as     follows.

1. The 2^nd opposite party shall pay Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one lakh) to the 1^st complainant towards compensation for the deficient service offered to the complainants and for the unfair trade practice committed by the 2^nd opposite party.
2. The 2^nd opposite party shall also pay Rs.10,000/- to the 1^st complainant towards costs of this proceedings.

         Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 6^th day of April 2018.

                                                          Sd/-Beena Kumari V.K., Member

                                                          Sd/-Cherian K. Kuriakose, President

                                                          Sd/-Sheen Jose, Member.

                                                                   Forwarded by Order

                                                                  Senior Superintendent

                                                APPENDIX

Opposite party’s Exhibits         ::   

Depositions        :

                   PW1 :         Wilfred Das

                   PW2 :         Mumtaz K.H.      

                   DW1 :         Neil Kurian

Date of Despatch        :

                   By Hand    :

                   By Post      :

…………………