AIR INDIA Vs. ASHA GOSWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant which was opposite party No. 1 before the District Forum against order dated 24.9.2003 passed by the District Forum, Jaipur Il, camp Jaipur in Complaint No. 595/2000 by which the complaint of the complainant -respondent No. 1 was partially allowed against the appellant in the manner that the appellant would pay a sum of Rs. 30,000 for inconvenience to complainant respondent No. 1 and further to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000 as costs within one month and complaint against respondent No. 2 which was opposite party No. 2 before the District Forum was rejected.

(2.) IT arises in the following circumstances - That the complainant -respondent had filed a complaint before the District Forum, Jaipur II, camp Jaipur on 13.3.1998 inter alia stating that on 31.3.1997 for going from Delhi to Washington (USA) the complainant -respondent No. l had purchased air ticket bearing No. Q 098 4211566897 of Air India with Flight No. 3001 through the medium of respondent No. 2 Komal Travels after paying Rs. 52,870 for journey to be made from Delhi on 6.4.1997. It was further stated that the said ticket was a confirmed and was marked O.K. It was further stated that thereafter complainant -respondent No. 1 along with her family members had gone to Delhi and had reached the International Airport where she found that her name was not in the list of passengers who were allowed to be boarded in the said plane. It was further stated that for that she felt inconvenience, discomfort and mental stress and ultimately she was allowed to go on 7.4.1997 and for that inconvenience and deficiency in service on the part of the appellant the present complaint was filed. A reply was filed by the appellant on 6.1.1999 and the main case of the appellant was that since the ticket in question was issued by Janta Travels and since that was not made a party, therefore, the complaint was not maintainable and further in place of Rs. 52,870 the complainant -respondent No. 1 had paid flight charges to the tune of Rs. 37,641. It was further stated in the reply that the said ticket for flight No. 3001 was belonging to a flight of United Airlines and why she was not allowed to board that flight on 6.4.1997 that could only be answered by the staff of United Airlines and as such United Airlines was also a necessary party and thus no case complaint be dismissed. A reply was also filed by respondent No. 2 on 7.10.1999 before the District Forum and respondent No. 2 had taken the same pleas which were taken by appellant in its reply. After hearing the parties, the District Forum, Jaipur II, camp Jaipur through impugned order dated 24.9.2003 had allowed the complaint of the complainant -respondent No. 1 inter alia holding that since the ticket in question was issued for a journey that was to take place on 6.4.1997 but since on that day she had not made journey and she was allowed to go on 7.4.1997, therefore, there was deficiency in service on the part of the appellant. Aggrieved from the said order dated 24.9.2003 passed by the District Forum, Jaipur II, camp Jaipur, this appeal has been filed by the appellant.

(3.) IN this appeal the following contentions have been raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant: (i) That if any ticket had been issued by the travelling agent of airlines and if any wrong entry regarding despatch of timing pertaining to the flight, etc. had been made by the agent, for that principal could not be held liable. (ii) Further since the Janta Travels was recognised as an agent of the appellant, therefore, appellant had no concern with Komal Travels respondent No. 2. (iii) Further it has been argued that if any mistake had been committed by the agent, for that principal could not be held liable. Thus, the District Forum has committed serious error and illegality in decreeing the claim of the complainant -respondent No. 1. Hence, the impugned order cannot be sustained and liable to be quashed and set aside and this appeal be allowed.