w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



InterGlobe Aviation Ltd. Through Ms.Namrata Singh, Senior Legal Counsel & Another v/s Shri S.N. Minda

    F.A.No.211 of 2009 against C.C.No.154 of 2008, Dist. Forum-II, Hyderabad.

    Decided On, 18 August 2009

    At, Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad

    By, SMT. M. SHREESHA
    By, HONBLE MEMBER & SRI K. SATYANAND
    By, HONBLE MEMBER

    Counsel for the Appellants: M/s.Indus Law Firm. Counsel for the Respondent: ----



Judgment Text

Oral Order (Per Smt M. Shreesha, Hon?ble Member)


Aggrieved by the order in C.C.154/2008 on the file of District Forum-II, Hyderabad , the opposite parties preferred this appeal.


The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant was scheduled to participate in Satguru Darshan & Satsangh on 15th and 16th December, 2007 at Beas, Punjab and purchased a flight ticket to travel on 14.12.2007 at 9.10 a.m. in flight no.6E 302 for his journey from Hyderabad to New Delhi from opposite party no.1 who is an agent of opposite party n.2. The flight is scheduled to arrive at New Delhi at 11.15 a.m. and from Delhi to Beas the complainant has to travel in the train and return from Beas to New Delhi on 17.12.2007 for which he got the reserved ticket in train No. 8102 and from New Delhi to Hyderabad he was scheduled to travel by Spicejet on 18.12.2007 at 8.10 a.m. The complainant submits that this Satsang Satguru Darshan was of great sentimental value to him. The complainant arrived at the airport on 14.12.2007 two hours prior to schedule time. Opposite Party no.1 issued the boarding pass and allotted seat no.15A. In the Boarding pass the boarding time was mentioned as 10.50 a.m. and the complainant questioned the delay at the time of boarding itself and when the complainant was in security check he was informed that due to fog the flight was cancelled. The complainant submits that if the fog was there the other flights could not have been taken off from the Airport and in the same timings Kingfisher 801 flight take off at 10.33 a.m. The complainant submits that he paid Rs.3,420/- from Hyderabad to New Delhi which amount was not returned to him . The complainant could not catch the other flight and he cancelled all his tickets and the opposite party also charged Rs.750/- towards cancellation charges and the railway authorities collected Rs.60/- towards cancellation charges. Hence the complainant approached the District Forum seeking direction to the opposite parties to refund Rs.3,420/- with interest at 18%, refund cancellation charges of Rs.750/- towards the Spicejet cancellation charges and to refund Rs.60/- towards the cancellation charges of return railway ticket, to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation and Rs.10,000/- towards costs.


The opposite parties filed counter stating that only due to dense fog and bad weather at Delhi Airport the flight no.6E 301 was delayed and ultimately cancelled for reasons beyond their control since the visibility at Delhi airport dropped to around 50 mts. and the runway visibility range dropped to 75 mts. Therefore flight 6E 301 which was scheduled to depart from Delhi at 6.15 a.m. and arrive at Hyderabad at 8.30 a.m. could not take off at scheduled time. At 10.30 a.m. officials of the opposite party Hyderabad airport received a call from the centralized Indigo Operations Control Center that the Flight 6E 301 from Delhi stood cancelled due to reasons beyond their control. The opposite parties submit that there is no deficiency in service on their behalf and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.


The District Forum based on the evidence adduced i.e. Exs.A1 to A8 and Exs.B1 to B3 documents allowed the complaint in part directing the opposite party no.1 to refund Rs.3,420/- with interest at 9% from the date of purchase of ticket till reasliation along with Rs.5000/- towards compensation and Rs.2000/- towards costs. The complaint against opposite party no.2 is dismissed.


Aggrieved by the said order opposite parties preferred this appeal.


The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the District Forum ought not to have awarded compensation of Rs.5000/- since the flight was cancelled due to bad weather conditions and fog which are beyond their control. More over the appellant was always ready and willing to refund the ticket amount to the complainant and the same was refused by the respondent/complainant on unreasonable grounds. The District Forum erred in not considering the affidavit of one Ms.Srividya Majeti filed on behalf of the appellants herein.


We observe from the record that it is an admitted fact that the complainant purchased ticket for his journey from Hyderabad to New Delhi from opposite party no.2 who is an agent of opposite party no.1 scheduled to travel on 14.12.2007 . It is the complainant?s case that he intended to have Satguru Darshan, and also took return train tickets from Beas to Delhi by train and from Delhi to Hyderabad by flight ticket of Spicejet on 18.12.2007. It is the further case of the complainant that on 14.12.2007 when he arrived at Hyderabad Airport two hours prior to the schedule time at 9.10 a.m. he was given a boarding pass wherein boarding time is mentioned as 10.50 A.M. and he waited for two hours at the security check and he was informed that the flight was cancelled due to bad weather conditions . It is the complainant?s contention that it was only due to the delayed response of the opposite party that he could not catch any other flight to Delhi and missed his Satguru Darshan which is of a great sentimental value to him. It is the case of the opposite parties that it was only because of poor visibility of runway and due to dense fog conditions that the flight from Hyderabad to Delhi was cancelled. Though the learned counsel for the appellants contended that they were ready and willing to refund the ticket amount but the complainant did not accept the sam

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

e is not supported by any documentary evidence. The respondent/complainant was made to wait for almost three hours before the decision of cancellation was made thereby not giving him an opportunity to take other flight to Delhi and catch connecting flight to Beas . Taking into consideration that his return tickets were also booked and he intended to attend his Guru?s Darshan awarding compensation of Rs.5000/- cannot be said to be excessive. Therefore we see no reason to interfere with the well considered order of the District Forum. This appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. Time for compliance four weeks.
O R