Decided on March 02,2006

SANTOSH Respondents


- (1.) BOTH the appeals are being disposed of by this common order as there is common point of law and facts and the respondents have sought same relief for their grievances.
(2.) ON account of having denied the boarding pass to the respondents in spite of being in possession of air ticket of the appellant -airlines with an allegedly confirmed status, the District Form has vide impugned order dated 18.5.2001 given the following directions to the appellant : " Appellant to pay the money spent by the respondent after adjusting their ticket if already returned for the unused journey, otherwise the full amount of the tickets with interest @ 9% from 24.6.1997 till its realisation. Respondents are also entitled for a sum of Rs. 10,000 i.e. Rs. 5,000 each for stay of respondents at London on denial to enter in the plane by the appellant. The respondents are also entitled for damages amounting to Rs. 5,000 each and also Rs. 3,000 each as cost. We thus direct appellant to pay to the respondents the amount spent by respondents for their journey from London to Delhi after adjustment of the amount if any returned by the appellant to the respondents for not undertaken journey on the tickets issued by them for the Sector London to Delhi, otherwise full amount spent by the respondents for their journey from London to Delhi be paid by appellant to them with 9% interest from 24.6.1997 till its realisation together with Rs. 5,000 each for the stay of each respondent at London airport together with Rs. 5,000 each as damages/compensation and Rs. 3,000 as cost within a period of 45 days of each order."
(3.) FEELING aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal. The case of the respondent/complainant before the District Forum in brief was as under : Respondents had purchased tickets of appellant Ex -Delhi to Calgary with break journey at Abu Dhabi, London, Toronto and also return journey from Ex -Calgary to Delhi with breaks at Toronto, London, Abu Dhabi against due payment from respondent No. 2. The respondents had undertaken their journey Ex -Delhi to Calgary with breaks as pointed out above with confirmed tickets and for the return journey the ticket was O.K. upto Abu Dhabi and from Abu Dhabi to New Delhi, the tickets were not having confirmed seats. As the respondents were not permitted to undertake the journey at London so under the compelling circumstances they purchased another ticket Ex -London to Delhi of British Airways after making due payments amounting to Rs. 32,000. The respondents were having O.K. tickets for seat in the flight for 24.6.1997 but on account of appellant s carelessness and negligence, they had to stay for many hours at London Airport and spent Rs. 5,000 each for stay at London Airport. The respondents lodged complaint at London Airport and at serial No. 4 remarks were made that "Regret, unable to assist until load reduced, Sd./ on 24.6.1997". The main plank of defence of the appellant before the District Forum was that respondents did not have to stay at London and Abu Dhabi but they were only to change flight there and this fact was borne out from the ticket indicating the cross against London and Abu Dhabi meaning thereby that breakup journey was not there. Secondly, that the respondents obtained open ticket for return journey from Calgary to Delhi but when they got their reservation for reverse journey they were not granted reservations from Abu Dhabi to Delhi. Thirdly, when they checked in at London they were denied boarding because they did not have transit visa and confirmed reservation for Abu Dhabi which was the requirement of law. Had the appellant taken the respondents to Abu Dhabi not only the Airlines but also the passengers would have been prosecuted and, therefore, the appellant had no other option than to deny the boarding at London. In other words the respondents were not having any VISA for Abu Dhabi nor were tickets provided for journey to Abu Dhabi and if they would have been permitted to have the journey from London to Abu Dhabi without any confirmed status from Abu Dhabi to New Delhi they would have certainly been arrested at Abu Dhabi and in order to avoid their arrest they were not permitted to travel in the flight from London to Abu Dhabi.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.