JET AIRWAYS INDIA LTD vs Abdul Wahid

ORDER dated 3. 11. 2006 passed by the learned Divisional Consumer Protection Forum, Srinagar (hereinafter to be referred to as the Forum has been challenged through the medium of this appeal filed under Section 13 of the Jandk Consumer Protection Act, 1987 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act), whereby the Forum has awarded a compensation of Rs 50,000 in favour of the respondent made payable within four weeks failing which interest at the rate of 6% per annum was to be charged. Litigation charges in the sum of Rs. 3000 were also awarded.

THE brief facts of the case are that respondent while acting as Vice-Chancellor of the University of Kashmir on March 9, 2006, travelled from Srinagar to Jammu in the Jet Airways India Pvt. Ltd. and had a confirmed return ticket in flight No. 605 for 11. 3. 2006. The scheduled flight time from Jammu to Srinagar was at 1. 35 p. m. The respondent arrived at the passenger counter at the airport about one hour earlier to the scheduled departure time and stood in the queue along with co-passengers. One Smt. Arpana at that time was handling the passenger counter and she was taking about 7 to 8 minutes time to attend every passenger. When the turn of the respondent came, the said employee responded to the respondent "sorry Sir, there is no seat left". The respondent argued with her that he had an O. K. ticket and was in the queue in time, how it could happen. Finding no answer to this inquiry she passed on the ticket of the respondent to another counter which too was being handled by a lady employee. She examined the case of the respondent for about ten minutes and then responded "there is no seat left". The respondent put a question to her that how it could happen with a passenger who held an O. K. ticket and was in time in reaching the passenger counter. A curt reply came from her "sir, you were late in reporting". Finding the respondent facing unpleasant situation some passengers also showed sympathy to him. One Mr Rajnesh who works as Public Relations Officer with Jandk Bank Ltd. , Jammu was his old acquaintee took active initiative in helping the respondent and arranged a seat for him in the Indian Airlines which was going to Srinagar and by chance a seat was available. The respondent had a pre-arranged important official meeting fixed at 3 p. m. in his office. For the next day respondent was committed to be a Chief Guest of a function, the venue whereof was in Government College of Education, Srinagar. Because of un-savoury incident; the respondent was mentally and emotionally disturbed as well as felt publicly humiliated. The Indian Airlines flight left Jammu Airport for Srinagar at 2. 00 p. m. The respondent has specifically alleged in the complaint that till the time, he could get a seat in the Indian Airlines many passengers of the Jet Airlines who knew him personally were laughing at his miserable plight to which he had been confronted. It was emphatically averred in the complaint that "torture, agony embarrassment and shock at the Airport" has been one of the worst incidents of life and such treatment on the part of Airlines cannot be brushed aside so that honourable citizens may be treated like this". Respondent had demanded compensation of Rs two lakh "in order to get his honour partly salvaged". In the written version preliminary objections were taken that the relief sought was absolutely baseless because the complaint "smacked of overpowering ego and, therefore, required no consideration on merits". The appellant is considered as best domestic Airline and has won several international and national awards and this position could only be won by following meticulously and adhering to all rules and practice for running Airline services. On facts, it is submitted that the scheduled departure time of the flight in question was at 1. 30 p. m. and the respondent had reported for checking at 1. 25 p. m. when the checking counters for the said flight (9w605) were closed after completing all the departure formalities. The delay causing conduct of the ground staff was denied. On the alleged incident inquiry was conducted and it was found that after handing over the boarding cards to the customers who were having confirmed tickets repeated announcements were made for absent passengers having confirmed tickets. On their failure to turn up, the remaining boarding cards were issued to "wait listed passengers" who had reported for checking. The respondent''s case was found of ''late report'', therefore, he could not be attended. It is also pleaded that respondent was extended full assistance and help by the ground staff of the appellant and there could be no cause of undergoing mental torture and suffering public humiliation. That the Indian Airlines flight had departed from Jammu to Srinagar at 2. 00 p. m. whereas, the flight of the appellant departed 20 minutes late i. e. 2. 20 p. m. The allegations with regard to holding an official meeting on the same day as well as to attend an official function as a chief guest on the next date, were denied on the basis of want of knowledge.

The complainant besides appearing as a witness for himself also examined Mr G. N. Kanth, Advocate as his witness. The appellant had failed to produce any evidence though many opportunities were granted by the Forum. However, we find on record affidavit of one Mr. Sunil Hakim who had shown himself to have worked as Supervisor in Customer Services of the appellant.

HEARD the arguments of the Counsels of the parties as well as perused the record. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant during the course of his arguments has taken support from the marshy and bogey legal questions which have been framed in the memo of appeal. He has laid great stress on the ground that the learned Forum was not legally justified when it failed to take note of the plea of the appellant that due to heavy rains in Bombay its head office remained flooded for a pretty long time and this act of God contributed in causing delay in regular flights including the one in question. The non-accommodation of the respondent in the regular flight had also a bearing with delayed flight. The Forum did not afford sufficient time to the appellant to lead its evidence to produce the record from head office and has decided the claim in a hasty and slip-shod manner. Since reasonable opportunity was not given to the appellant to lead the evidence so the Forum acted against the basic legal principles of audi artum partem. Amongst the morass of facts stated in the memo of appeal, we find in para 6 a statement of fact that respondent herein along with Mr. M. K. Kaul were late to arrive before the counter so they were escorted and got flown by the staff of the appellant in the available Indian Airlines flight along with their baggage. The companion of the respondent namely, Mr. M. K. Kaul was satisfied with the situation which had been faced for no fault of the appellant but the respondent herein had raised a false and cooked up claim. Concluding his argument, the Counsel has contended that respondent has not suffered any damage as there is no evidence on the record to prove this plea. The heart of the matter was that respondent had reached late before the passenger counter, when after making repeated announcements the boarding in the craft had been closed. Now, he is not entitled to take the benefit of his own negligence. That respondent has failed to examine Mr Chetan Sharma, driver of Jammu University who, according to him, had dropped him at the Airport at 12. 30 p. m. and in the absence of any independent evidence his arrival at that time cannot be accepted.

IN rebuttal, Mr. G. N. Kanth, Advocate appearing for the respondent, has pleaded that the respondent, who is the Head of the Kashmir University had no prior enmity, grudge or bias against the appellant to cook up a false case. He is a man of status in the society and because of sterling qualities of head and heart he could attain that status which could not be exposed to be lowered down by putting up a false claim for the gaining of paltry amount by way of damages. The truth is that his honour was lowered down by the act of humiliation within public view and he had been physically, mentally and emotionally hurt. Travel facility against a confirmed air ticket for his back journey from Jammu to Srinagar was illegally denied to him and in order to vindicate his legal right, he approached the Forum which course of conduct is expected from every enlightened citizen of the country. Continuing his arguments he urged that negligent act of the appellant has been proved by the deposition of the respondent which has found corroborative support from the testimony of independent witness namely, Mr. G. N. Kanth, Advocate, who witnessed the miserable plight of the respondent at the Airport and then accompanied him in the flight of Indian Airlines which took off at 2 p. m. from Jammu Airport. The ground urged in the memo of appeal which is being reiterated in the argument that sufficient time was not granted to the appellant to produce the evidence is baseless being not supported from the record of the proceedings of the complaint. The record shows that on 27. 6. 2006, the evidence of the respondent was closed and the appellant was granted opportunity to lead its evidence on 17. 7. 2006. On that date no evidence was produced by the appellant and at the request being made by the Counsel time was granted for the next date, which was fixed on 24. 7. 2006. Again no evidence was produced and final opportunity was granted to lead the evidence for 27. 7. 2006. On 27. 7. 2006, further time was sought on behalf of the appellant for production of evidence which was granted with the condition that in case on the next date i. e. on 17. 8. 2006 the evidence was not produced the same shall be deemed to have been closed. On 17. 8. 2006, request was made by the Counsel of the appellant that the witness had to come from Jammu but the records had to come from Mumbai and due to floods the record was not made available at Jammu and few days time for the sake of justice was sought. The case was adjourned for 22. 8. 2006 and again on that day no evidence was produced on behalf of the appellant and the right to lead the evidence was closed. It is also contended that the proceedings before the Forum were of summary nature and it cannot be said that the evidence was closed in a hasty or slipshod manner. The Head Office of the appellant at Mumbai could not remain inaccessible during all this long spell of time extending for about two months and that the flooding of the Head office is a lame excuse concocted to put up a false defence for refusing the just claim of the respondent. We have perused the record and considered the submissions of Counsel of the parties. In the written version the appellant has taken the plea that the respondent reported for check-in at 1. 25 p. m. i. e. much after the check-in counters for Flight No. 9w605 from Jammu to Srinagar were closed and the departure formalities had been completed. The departure time was 1. 35 p. m. It is also pleaded that the Jet Airways flight was late in taking off from Jammu Airport because it departed at 2. 20 p. m. whereas the Indian Airlines flight had departed earlier i. e. at 2 p. m. From the evidence of the respondent, we find that he travelled straightaway to Airport from Jammu University in Car No. JK02u-7590 which was driven by Mr Chetan Sharma, who had dropped him inside the restricted area of the Airport around 12. 30 p. m. i. e. one hour earlier than the scheduled departure time of the plane, which was 1. 35 p. m. That when he reached for reporting, all the counters of Jet Airways were open; that he had been standing in the middle of the queue of one of the counters, where eight passengers were in front of him and about six passengers were behind him. He has also stated that he remained in the queue for twenty minutes and after feeling tired loudly protested the lady employee, namely, Smt. Aparna; that she was slow in attending the passengers as she was spending 7 to 8 minutes on each passenger in issuing the boarding cards. Thereafter, she informed the respondent that there was no seat left for Srinagar. He has categorically denied the allegation of the appellant that he reported before the counter at 1. 25 p. m. when only ten minutes were left for departure and on that count boarding card was not issued to him. Mr G. N. Kanth, witness of the respondent has stated that he is a senior IAS retired officer from the State of Jandk bureaucracy and was a passenger in the Indian Airlines on 11. 3. 2006. Approximately at 12 a. m. he had seen the respondent standing in a queue for securing a boarding card from Jet Airways Airlines counter. That when he (the witness) reached for security checkup at the departure lounge, he met the respondent there and learnt from him that he too was going in the Indian Airlines flight with him because the lady employee had given him a chilling reply that there was no seat available for him. On further inquiry the respondent had told him (the witness) that on his loud protest and other passenger''s expression of anger, he could secure a seat in the Indian Airlines flight. Against such cogent and convincing evidence led by the respondent, there is no evidence of the appellant on the record. We are surprised to see how affidavit of Mr. Sunil Hakim, who works as a supervisor in Customer Services at Jammu Airport on behalf of the appellant was got attested from a Notary on 22. 8. 2006 at Srinagar showing his presence there when it is pleaded on behalf of the appellant that evidence could not be led because head office had remained non-functional, due to floods. After giving four opportunities to the appellant, its right to lead the evidence was closed on 22. 8. 2006 and why this affidavit which showed the presence of Mr. Sunil Hakim in Srinagar on 22. 8. 2006 was withheld. The affidavit has not been officially received in the record of the Commission because there is no order of the Forum in this behalf.

VIEWED from other angle also, the case of the appellant is found based on falsehood because in normal course of business it cannot be believed that boarding cards issuing counter would have been closed at 1. 25 p. m. when the flight in question was late as per the own showing of the appellant in reaching Jammu Airport and was also late in taking off from Jammu Airport by 45 minutes (i. e. at 2. 20 p. m.) than the scheduled time. The Indian Airlines flight which took off from Jammu Airport to Srinagar at 2. 00 p. m. had the magnanimity of accommodating a harassed and humiliated passenger (the respondent) even after 1. 25 p. m. when its flight took off 20 minutes earlier to the delayed flight of the appellant. In case this contention of the appellant is accepted even then the legal duty to provide travelling facility against an O. K. ticket cannot be warded off. Non-production of Mr. M. K. Kaul, an alleged co-passenger with the respondent of the Indian Airlines flight as a witness by the respondent is not a lapse on the part of the respondent but adverse inference can be drawn against the defence of the appellant that its staff members at the ground level had provided alternative flight to the respondent in the Indian Airlines flight.

FROM the evidence on record, we find that a responsible Airlines Company, namely, Jet Airways India Ltd. , instead of admitting its fault before the Consumer Forum had put up a false and cooked up defence. Reckless allegations have been made in the written version (in Para No. 2) against such a consumer who is a responsible public functionary and being head of the Kashmir University enjoys respect particularly in the teaching and taughts fraternity. The relevant portion is reproduced hereunder: "that the complainant has sought redressal towards his alleged grievance, against OPs, which is absolutely baseless and evinces a lack of understanding the matter at hand. On the face of it, the complaint smacks of overpowering ego and therefore requires no consideration on merits. The allegations set out in the complaint are rejected outrightly. "

Such an unsavoury plea should have found no place in the pleadings when admittedly the appellant had failed to provide the facility of air travel at the scheduled time to all its passengers as it took off late by 45 minutes. This is a case where a pot is calling the kettle as black. The Counsel of the appellant has cited the case of Air India Ltd. v. R. Nagarajan and Anr. , II (1997) CPJ 163, in support of his arguments which has no application to the facts of the present case because in that case no evidence was adduced with regard to the damages suffered by the complainant and the quantum of compensation was refused but the facts of the present case are different. Here, the respondent, who is a man of status in the society was humiliated and harassed, He was assisted by PRO of Jandk Bank Ltd. , Jammu in getting a place in that flight. In his cross-examination the respondent has categorically stated that staff members of the appellant had not extended him the least courtesy of arranging the ticket of the Indian Airlines. He had convened an important meeting in his office in Srinagar at 3 p. m. on the day of the travel and was committed to be the chief guest of a function in the Government College of Education on the next day. As a normal human being the respondent must have undergone mental and physical torture. There is not even an iota of evidence to the contrary that he was not allowed to undergo any kind of sufferings and was comfortably seated in the flight of Indian Airlines. Similarly, the law cited by the Counsel as laid down in the cases of Delta Airlines Inc. v. Consumer Education and Research Society and Anr. , I (1998) CPJ 26 (NC), H. R. S. Goel and Sarojini Goel v. Delhi Development Authority, I (1998) CPJ 31 (NC); Indian Airlines Corporation v. Farooq Ahmed Jan, 2001 SLJ 153 and Maya Vaid v. G. S. Shandil, 2005 (2) Judicial Reports Consumer 399, is of no help as the facts of all these cases are different from the facts of the case in hand.

In view of the discussion made above, we find that it is a case of gross negligence in providing air travel service to a bona fide consumer who suffered emotionally, mentally and physically at the hands of the staff members of the appellant. Not only that, reckless and humiliating accusations have been made in the pleadings against his integrity and conduct which course of conduct in the proceedings is not approved. We have failed to understand how affidavit of Mr. Sunil Hakim has been got inserted in the record of the proceedings. Taking stock of all these facts and circumstances we find no fault in the impugned order, which is confirmed. The appeal is found meritless and dismissed with costs of Rs. five thousands. The record of the Forum be returned forthwith and appeal be consigned to the records. Appeal dismissed.