THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.

C.C. 18/2013

Dated this the 20^th  day of September 2016

                       (Smt. Rose Jose, B.Sc, LLB.                    :  President)

                       Smt.Beena Joseph, M.A                           : Member

                     Sri. Joseph Mathew, MA, LLB                   : Member

ORDER

Present: Rose Jose, President:

          This petition is filed Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

            Petitioners are husband and wife and professionally doctors.  Their case is that, they have booked two air tickets in the flight operated by the 2^nd OP through their agent the 1^st OP from Calicut to Mumbay on 25.10.2012.  The purpose of the journey was to attended the medical P.G.examination, the National eligibility cum entrance test(NEET) which was scheduled to be conducted on 04.12.2012 at Mumbay. The tickets was confirmed and the scheduled date and time of the flight was 03.12.2012 at 2.10P.M.  On 29.11.2012,  they were informed by the opposite parties that the said flight was cancelled without assigning any reason.  Due to the cancelation of the said flight the petitioners were forced to arrange tickets in another flight by spending more amount. 

            It is stated by the petitioners that for arranging tickets in another flight they have to spend much time and that badly affected their preparation for the examination.  The cancellation of the flight without assigning any valid reason and properly informing them is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and that caused much mental stress and strain and also heavy financial loss and other difficulties to them.  Hence this petition seeking reliefs.

            The first OP filed version  contending that this petition is false,  frivolous, vexatious  and hence not maintainable either in Law or on facts of the case.  It is stated that they have booked two tickets for the petitioners on request from Malabar Travels Perambra on 25.10.2012 from Calicut to Mumbai on the said flight.  The flight was cancelled and this matter was informed to the Malabar Travels from where the petitioner had booked their tickets on 25.11.2012. The 2^nd OP also had informed the matter to the petitioner  through an SMS to his personal Mobile number 9446555822 on 24.11.2012 at 19.12 hours.  They denied  the statement of the petitioner

otherwise as false.  It is submitted that even before the request from the petitioners or waiting for the refund of the ticket charge from the 2^nd OP they have booked two tickets for the petitioners in Air India Express departing  on the same day at 6.30 P.M and on request from the petitioners through Malabar Travels they have issued the tickets to them on 27.11.2012 itself. It is contented that they even got refund of the ticket fare from the 2^nd OP only on 28.11.2012.

            It is further stated that they have no role in the cancellation of the flight by the 2^nd OP and if at all the petitioners are eligible to get compensation, the 2^nd OP is liable for the same.  All other allegations of the petitioner are denied by them as false and frivolous.  They have provided the best service they can, and hence there is no deficiency in service on their side and prayed to dismiss the petition with cost to them.

            The 2^nd OP in their version submitted that, the said flight was cancelled due to technical and operational reasons.  The cancellation was immediately informed to the petitioner at his mobile number 9446555822 on 24.11.2012 at 19:12:21 hours through  an SMS and the same was received by the petitioner also.  Thereafter they have refunded the full ticket  charge of Rs.5818/- on 28.11.2012 to the account of the agent from where the  petitioners had purchased their tickets.  It is further submitted that a flight may cancelled due to many reasons such as bad weather, technical or operational defects, direction from Air Traffic controllers etc.etc. which are beyond their control and in such situations,  what they can do is to  try their best to minimize the inconveniences of the passengers.  Accordingly they have informed the matter to the petitioners immediately and refunded the ticket amount.  More over all the passengers are governed by the terms of “carriage by Air Act 1972” and Rules 1.4 and 1.5 of Civil Aviation Requirements w.e.f. 15.08.2010 onwards which specifically absolve the flight operators from any compensation on account of cancellation of flights , on account of operational reasons and other unforeseen circumstances beyond their control.  They have done their part well and no fault on their side and hence there is no deficiency in service on their side and they are not liable to compensate the petitioners in any case.  All other allegations are denied as false and prayed to dismiss the petition with their cost.

            The petitioners filed affidavit and produced 4 documents  and these are marked as Exts. A1 to A4 on their side.  2^nd OP produced 2 documents and was marked as Exts.B1&B2.  Exts.A1 & A2 are the copies of Admit Card for NEET, A3 & A4 are copies of Air tickets of the petitioners dtd.03.12.2012.  B1 is the copy of SMS sent by 2^nd OP to the petitioners mobile number 9446555822 dtd. 24.11.2012 at 19:12:21 hours and B2 is the copy of “terms of carriage”.

            There is no dispute with regard to the booking of the Air Tickets by the petitioners and the fact of cancellation of the said flight.  It goes without say that the unexpected cancellation of a flight will cause untold sufferings and financial loss to all its passengers because all are booking the flights for some specific purposes.  But it is known to all that a flight may cancel at any time due to some unavoidable reasons.  It may cancel even after issuing boarding pass also.  If considering the protest from the passengers an operator decides to conduct a flight and if anything unpleasant happens and the passengers are not reaching their destinations, what will be the consequences.  What explanation can the operator give before the authorities and the public.  One must think about that also.

            So in such circumstances an operator can do is to inform the passenger the fact of cancellation of the flight at the earliest if they know the fact well in advance to minimize their difficulties or to provide necessary facilities like arranging another flight,  providing food and accommodation etc… if the cancellation is after issuing boarding pass.  Here Ext.B1 shows that 2^nd OP had intimated the fact to the petitioner through the SMS to his personal mobile number 9446555822 on 24.04.2012 itself.  The petitioner has no case that the said mobile number is not his own.  At the present situation there is no reason to disbelieve the fact of issuance of the said message  by the OP because every operators are doing this.  Perhaps as a doctor due to his workload the petitioner may not have noticed the same.

            Even if for the arguments sake it is admitted that the OP has not sent such a message, it is admitted by the petitioner that the opposite parties have informed the matter on 29.11.2012, that is 4 days in advance before the scheduled time of departure.  This shows that the OP had performed their part as much as possible.  More over they have refunded the full ticket fare to the agent on 28.11.2012 itself.  Intimating the reasons for cancelation of the flight to each and every passenger and give compensation to all of them for the cancelation not because of the fault of the operator is not practical or possible or it is not the liability of the operators as per their rules.

            So also the petitioner himself had admitted in his affidavit that the 1^st OP had re-issued another ticket in another flight on the same day of the departure.  This proves that the 1^st OP had done his best to help the petitioners to travel on the same day by arranging tickets in another flight.  The other allegation of the petitioner is that for securing tickets for the 2^nd time he spend more amount.  But it is to be remembered that the difference in ticket charges among different air ways is quite common.  This can not be considered as a deficiency in service on the part of the travel agent or flight operators.

            Considering all the facts stated and after perusing the documents  on record it is found that the opposite parties have performed their duties sincerely as much as they can.  Hence we could not find any fault with them and so of the opinion that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties as alleged by the petitioners.

In the result the petition is dismissed without cost.

Dated this the 20^th day of September 2016.

Date of filing: 16.01.2013.

SD/-MEMBER                             SD/-PRESIDENT                    SD/-MEMBER

APPENDIX

Documents exhibited for the complainant:

A1. Copy of Admit card for Neet  to the first complainant

A2. Copy of admit card for Neet to the 2^nd complainant

A3. Copies of Air Tickets of the petitioners dtd.03.12.2012

A4. Copies of Air Tickets of the petitioners dtd.03.12.2012

Documents exhibited for the opposite party:

B1. Copy of SMS sent by 2^nd OP to the petitioners mobile number dtd.24.11.2012

B2. Copy of  terms of carriage.

Witness examined for the complainant:

 Nil

Witness examined for the opposite Party:

 None

                                                                                                                          Sd/-President

//True copy//

(Forwarded/By Order)

SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT