A.K.ANNAMALAI, J. - (1.) The complainant filed this complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act- 1986, claiming direction for reimbursement of Rs.29,682/- being the loss of sitting fees and Air fare wrongfully forfeited by the opposite parties and Rs.25,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and humiliation suffered by the complainant due to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and for costs.
(2.) The Gist of the complaint in brief is as follows :- The complainant is a retired High Court Judge and former Chairman of Intellectual Property Appellate Board of India purchased a ticket through his travel agency for his journey by air from Chennai to Coimbatore on 28.04.2010 by flight SG-281 and for his return journey from Coimbatore to Chennai on 29.4.2010 by flight SG 282 operated by the opposite parties. The departure of flight No.SG 281 from Chennai on 28.4.2010 was at 8.45 hours to reach Coimbatore at 9.05 hours. On 28.4.2010 the complainant reached the airport in time and check in by 8.05 hours. The boarding pass was issued by allotting the seat No.13-E. After undergone security check he reached the waiting lounge and waiting for the announcement for calling upon the passengers to board the flight, when it was announced the complainant was about to stand in queue which was very long. One of the ground staff of the opposite parties on knowing the identity of the complainant extended the courtesy of requesting the complainant to wait instead of going through the routine queue and assured that he would come and take the complainant once the rush in the queue is over. Accepting the words the complainant was waiting in the lounge till 8.40 hours and he was under impression that there is unscheduled delay of departure of the flight by few minutes as the said staff did not turn up for taking the complainant and when the complainant went to the boarding gate at 8.40 hours of his own accord to the shock and dismay the complainant was informed that the boarding process for the flight was already over. Plane has been non jockeyed and the complainant cannot board the flight and any amount of persuasion by the complainant did not have any positive effect and he was denied boarding without any justifiable reason and there was no final announcement through the public system before the boarding gate was closed and thee was no phone call to the cell number furnished by the complainant as mentioned in the ticket before the closure of boarding gate. If the passenger did not turn up as a lost resort the ground staff to run through the waiting passengers to verify their destination and to trace out the missing one after the checking in. None of the procedure was done and when the complainant contacted the ground staff at the boarding gate at 8.40 am she told that she tried to contact the complainant over phone which was false as no such call was recorded in the cell phone of the complainant. Even though the complainant voluntarily approached the boarding gate since there was neither a paging announcement nor a phone call for the last minute boarding call having checked in for the flight undergone security check the complainant cannot go anywhere except to the waiting lounge to board the plane. The explanation of the ground staff for not allowing the complainant would only prove their lapse. The ground staff who was at the boarding gate denied the complainant boarding of flight tore off the boarding pass at 8.50 hours and kept it with her and when the complainant insisted that he be given a letter that he did not travel the said staff made an endorsement on the ticket as follows :- "PAX CHECKED IN AND NOT BOARD THE FLIGHT PAX GATE NO SHOW FOR THE FLIGHT" and signed her name after affixing the seal of the opposite parties. Hence complainant sent notice to the 1st opposite party on 29.4.2010 calling for compensation for the loss and inconvenience for which a reply was received with false allegations as though complainant has not reported and there was no response from the given telephone of the complainant and subsequently the complainant sent a rejoinder to the opposite parties and filed this complaint claiming the reliefs as stated above.
(3.) In the proceedings before this Commission in this complaint, the opposite parties 1 and 2 did not turn up in spite of the notices served on them and thereby opposite parties 1 and 2 were set exparte on 2.3.2011 and 30.3.2011 respectively.;