JUSTICE AJIT BHARIHOKE, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL) 1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the State Commission, Maharashtra in Appeal No.A/08/217 whereby the State Commission while agreeing with the factual findings of the District Forum enhanced the compensation awarded by the District Forum from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/- besides litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-. The petitioners-opposite parties being aggrieved of the enhancement of compensation by the State Commission has field the instant revision petition. 2. Briefly stated the facts relevant for disposal of the revision petition are that the respondent, Smt. Malti Madhukar Pahade, while travelling in Air India flight from Mumbai to New York was served with stale food. Claiming that to be deficiency in service a consumer complaint was filed seeking compensation. 3. The District Forum, on consideration of pleadings of the parties allowed the complaint and directed the petitioners-opposite parties to pay total compensation of Rs.15,000/- given under two heads. The petitioners-opposite parties accepted the order of the District Forum and did not file any appeal. The complainant, however, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation preferred an appeal before the State Commission. 4. The State Commission after hearing the parties enhanced the compensation awarded to the complainant to the extent of Rs.1,00,000/- and disposed of the appeal with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the appellant. Relevant observations of the State Commission are reproduced as under: “While applying the ratio of the decision to the present case we find that, in the present issue, the complainant had seen the bad state of the curd which she has referred as “green as cherry”. Also the hair thread in the bowl of rice was also seen by her. Therefore, she may not have eaten them though she may have nauseated and vomited. It is true that she might have been required to go foodless during the remaining journey. Such conditions certainly create a very bad situation during the air travel where the complainant has to suffer a lot of inconvenience and agony till reaching her house.” 5. Counsel for the petitioners has contended that the enhancement of compensation by the State Commission is not justified because it is highly disproportionate to the negligence/deficiency in service alleged by the complainant. 6. We do not find merit in this contention. The State Commission has taken a view that when a person travels by air with a reputed airline he/she expects due courtesy and service and he/she also expects that proper food fit for human consumption would be served during board. In the instant case admittedly stale food was served to the complainant and there was a strand of hair in the bowl of rice also. From the record it appears that on coming to know about the serving of stale food in the flight an inquiry was conducted by the opposite parties and the handling caterer was fined a petty amount of Rs.20,000/-. We do not wish to comment upon the motive or reason of the concerned authority to impose such a meager amount of fine on the defaulting caterer particularly when the food supplied by the caterer is served to all the passengers travelling in the flight run by opposite parties. Taking into account the nature of deficiency in service and the fact that it would have affected the health of several passengers we do not find any fault with the order of the State Commission enhancing the compensation to Rs.1,00,000/-. There is no reason which may impel us to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. 7. The petitioners are directed to comply with the order within a month. The amount already paid during execution pursuant to the order of the District Forum as also the order of this Commission shall be adjusted against the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- as also the litigation cost awarded by the State Commission. | 
