Indian Airlines Limited And Anr. vs Dr. Savita Malhotra And Ors.

DISPUTE in this case falls in a narrow compass. It relates to over booking by Indian Airlines and denial of boarding passes to the complainant. The complainants had booked confirmed air tickets for flight IC -809 for 8.11.2001 on Delhi -Ranchi route. When they reached the domestic airport and presented their air tickets, boarding passes were not issued as the flight was full due to over booking. However, they offered seats for the next flight for 9.11.2001. The complainants were provided hotel accommodation at the expense of Indian Airlines at Hotel Centaur. The complainants, who were the President and General Secretary of the Indian Association of Social Psychiatry had its meeting on 9.11.2001 and 10.11.2001 at Ranchi. The first session of the meeting was to be convened in the evening of 8.11.2001.

THE contention of the complainants is that in their place, two VVIPS namely Shri Yashwant Sinha, the then Hon''ble Finance Minister, Government of India and His Excellency the Governor of Jharkhand were accommodated along with their staff at the last moment. The complainants claimed refund of the cost of air tickets along with damages and compensation to the tune of Rs. 3.5 lacs for physical harassment and mental agony suffered by them and also Rs. 50,000 towards expenses for running deficient services and litigation expenses.

THE case was contested by the Indian Airlines stating that the complainants reported late at the domestic airport terminal, hence boarding passes could not be issued to them as by that time, the flight was full to its capacity due to over booking and boarding passes were issued on first -cum -first serve basis. The complainants also accepted fresh boarding passes for the next day, i.e. on 9.11.2001. Therefore, the old contract was substituted by a new contract. The complainants also accepted the hospitality extended to them by the Indian Airlines by providing their stay at Hotel Centaur. The District Forum after analyzing the evidence concluded that the Indian Airlines were deficient in rendering service. Though the complainants had confirmed tickets and reported on time and they denied issuance of boarding passes and also noted that the mitigating circumstance that the Indian Airlines provided accommodation to the complainants and also allowed them to fly on the next day on the same ticket, therefore, quantified compensation at a sum of Rs. 20,000 with cost of litigation at Rs. 3,000 and this amount was to be paid within two months'' from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order failing which it was to carry interest @ 6% p.a.

AGGRIEVED by the order of the District Forum, the complainants filed an appeal before the State Commission for enhancement of compensation. The State Commission held that the District Forum has rightly analysed the facts of the case and come to the correct conclusion and therefore, appeal filed by the Indian Airlines Limited and Shift Manager of Indian Airlines Limited is dismissed with costs of Rs. 1,000,

DIS -satisfied by the order of the State Commission, the Indian Airlines has filed this Revision Petition before us.

IN this connection, it is worthwhile to go through the Judgment of this Commission in M/s. Air France v. M/s. Unik Traders and Anr., First Appeal No. 518 of 1995, decided on 21st March, 2002. In this case, it was observed as under: "Considering that there is well recognized practice of overbooking in the aircraft we will not say that the appellant was deficient in service, particularly when Krishan Kumar was given a stay in the Five Star Hotel and also offered compensation of US $ 300. But then no compensation has been awarded for four hours duration when Krishan Kumar had to wait at Frankfurt Airport to collect his luggage which must have caused him undue anxiety and mental tension. Perhaps at that time offer of a reasonable amount would have been sufficient to overcome this claim. It appears no payment for delay on this account was either offered or paid".

THE Commission held that if passenger is provided Five Star Hotel accommodation and also 300 US $, then it cannot be construed as deficiency in service but if the passengers had to wait for long hours and suffered tension to collect his luggage, then he has to be compensated separately for it. In this case as the Airlines had paid the amount awarded by the State Commission, the request of the learned Counsel for the Airlines to direct the complainants to refund the balance amount after deducting 300 dollars and reasonable amount for waiting period at the airport was not accepted by this Commission because it would be prudent to ask the complainant to refund the balance amount after 11 years of the cause of action.

IN this case the compensation awarded is only Rs. 20,000 whereas @ 300 dollars, taking Rs. 50 per dollar for two persons, it comes to Rs. 30,000 . As no separate compensation has been awarded for missing the conference on the day of travel and on the forenoon of the next day, the compensation awarded cannot be construed to be on the higher side. Therefore, we do not want to interfere with the well reasoned order of the Fora below. Accordingly, this Revision Petition is dismissed. As 50% of the amount has already been deposited with the State Commission, we direct the State Commission to release the amount to the respondents. We also direct the Indian Airlines, the petitioner to pay the balance amount to the respondents within four weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs. R.P. dismissed.