J.D.KAPOOR,J - (1.) THIS case demonstrates as to the mental agony and harassment suffered by a consumer due to the erratic functioning of an Airlines and their arrangement with their agents through whom appellant -Airlines sold the tickets. A newly married couple went to Kathmandu for honeymoon with a confirmed return ticket for 4th July, 1997. Their presence at Delhi was very essential as reception of their marriage was to be held on that date. On reaching the Airport they were informed that their tickets had been cancelled. As a consequence, they could not attend their reception.
(2.) ON account of the failure of the appellant -Airlines to inform the respondent No. 1 to its agent/The Explorers Unit and update about the cancellation of the flight on 29th June, 1997 the District Forum has vide impugned order dated 11th June, 2001 held the appellant guilty for deficiency in service and directed to pay the cost of the tickets and other expenses which the couple incurred for returning to Delhi on the next day. In total compensation of Rs. 50,000 with interest @ 9% and Rs. 5,000 towards cost of proceedings have been awarded.
(3.) THE solitary plea raised by the appellant through this appeal that the District Forum wrongly held it guilty for deficient in service as it had already informed its agent through whom the respondents purchased confirmed tickets that the return flight from Kathmandu to Delhi has been cancelled. Further that it was a common ticket from Delhi to Kathmandu and from Kathmandu to Delhi and was issued on 28th June, 1997 and though it was specifically mentioned on the tickets that departure from Delhi will be on 1st July, 1997 and from Kathmandu to Delhi will be on 4th July, 1997 but when the respondent -couple boarded the flight from Delhi to Kathmandu it was pointed out to them that return flight of 4th July, 1997 has already been cancelled and has been taken off from the schedule. However, this fact has not been proved either by way of evidence or document. Whenever any Airlines makes an arrangement of sale of tickets through their agents or sub -agents it is vicariously as well as directly liable for the acts of omission and commission of their agents. In such a situation the convenient plea the Airlines as well as the agent can take is that none of them is guilty because the appellant -Airline informed about the cancellation of the flight to the agent and the agent would take the plea that he had informed the consumer about the cancellation of the flight or that the agent had not received any kind of intimation from the Airlines about the flight having been taken off from its schedule.;