MANAGING DIRECTOR, AIR INDIA vs B.VIJAY KUMAR

THE Managing Director, Air India, has filed this Revision Petition challenging the orders passed against the Airlines by the State Commission, Tamil Nadu and the District Forum, Madras on a complaint preferred before the District Forum, Madras by the Respondent herein.

THE short facts of the case can be easily gathered from the summary of the pleadings contained in the Order of the State Commission which is reproduced below: "The Complainant booked a ticket from Madras to Penang via Singapore and from Penang to Madras via Singapore by Air India in the economy class. His ticket was confirmed for his return journey from Singapore to Madras on 22.11.1992 by flight No. AI 415. When he went to board the plane, the Air India authorities told him that no seat was available in economy class and insisted on changing his ticket to executive class. As he had business commitment at Bangalore Complainant was compelled to use his international credit card and convert the economy class ticket to executive class and travel from Singapore to Madras on 22.11.1992 by that flight. The Complainant has, therefore, filed this complaint for recovery of the excess amount of Rs. 28,000/ - paid by him and compensation in the sum of Rs. 65,000/-. It is not denied by the Opposite Parties that the complainant had a confirmed economy ticket for that flight. But, the case of the Opposite Parties is that the Air India authorities did not compel the complainant to travel by executive class and that the complainant voluntarily changed his ticket from economy class to executive class by using the international credit card? There was, therefore, no deficiency in service or negligence."

On a detailed consideration of the evidence adduced in the case the District Forum, Madras, accepted as true the case of the complainant that the Air India authorities at Singapore had refused to him an economy class seat and since he had urgent business dealings to be transacted at Bangalore on the next day, the complainant was compelled to change his confirmed economy class ticket to executive class ticket for his journey from Singapore to Madras on 22.11.1992 by Air India flight No. AI-415 by paying an excess fare of Rs. 28,000/-. On the basis of the said finding the District Forum held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Air India and directed the Airlines to refund the excess fare amount of Rs. 28,000/-collected from the complainant and also to pay to him a further sum of Rs. 28,000/- by way of compensation for inconvenience etc.

ON an appeal filed by Air India before the State Commission, Tamil Nadu, the State Commission independently conducted a scrutiny of the whole evidence and it ultimately confirmed the aforesaid finding of fact entered by the District Forum that the complainant had been compelled to purchase an executive class ticket for his journey from Singapore to Madras on the day in question by reason of the wrongful refusal by Air India staff at Singapore to provide him a seat in the economy class for which he held a confirmed ticket. In view of the said conclusion, the State Commission confirmed the direction issued by the District Forum that the Air India should refund to the complainant a sum of Rs. 28,000/- collected from him by way of excess fare. Without any further discussion of the question as to whether the fixation of the quantum of compensation by the District Forum was reasonable and justified, the State Commission merely stated that the compensation awarded by the District Forum was fair and it did not call for interference.

ALTHOUGH it was very forcefully contended before us by Counsel for the Air India that the finding of fact recorded by the District Forum and the State Commission that there was a refusal of an economy class seat to the complainant by the Air India staff at Singapore and it was in consequence thereof that the complainant was compelled to travel in the executive class after paying excess fare, there is no scope for any interference by us with the said finding inasmuch as it is purely a finding of fact concurrently arrived at by the forums below on an appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence produced in the case. Hence, the plea the Revision Petitioner that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the Air India cannot be countenanced at this revisional stage. However, we find that there is substance in the contention advanced by the Revision Petitioner that the District Forum has acted arbitrarily in fixing the quantum of compensation payable to the Respondent (Complainant) at Rs. 28,000/-. No evidence of any kind had been adduced by the complainant as to the nature of the inconvenience or hardship to which he was put to. The only fact that has been proved in the case is that the complainant had been denied a seat in the economy class despite his having a confirmed ticket for travel by the class and because of it he was put to a necessity of purchasing an executive class ticket by paying the excess fare of Rs. 28,000/-. The suffered by the complainant as a result of the said wrongful denial of the seat in the ay class was only that he had to expend a of Rs. 28,000/- by way of excess fare. The District Forum had already directed the and to the complainant of the said amount. n in the absence of any specific evidence it may be assumed that the complainant must have been put to a certain amount of inconvenience and hardship by reason of his being put to the necessity of paying the excess fare. For this, he can be awarded only a token compensation. There was no justification, whatever, for the direction given by the District Forum that Air India should pay a sum of Rs. 28,000/- to the complainant by way of compensation for such inconvenience. In our opinion, the said fixation of the quantum of compensation effected by the District Forum was wholly arbitrary and it should not have been upheld by the State Commission. We hold that it will be reasonable to fix the compensation payable to the Complainant for the inconvenience suffered by him at Rs. Accordingly, the Revision Petition is wed to the limited extent of reducing the compensation payable to the Complainant from Rs. 28,000/- to Rs. 2,500/-. The order passed by the District Forum will stand modified to this extent only and the direction for refund of the excess fare of Rs. 28,000/- will stand confirmed. The parties will bear their respective costs.