DAYABEN BHUPESH HALAI Vs. AIR INDIA INTERNATIONAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel. The appellant herein had travelled by Air India International flight from Ahmedabad to London via Mumbai. She was having a valid passport and it is her claim that she had a visa to undertake the aforesaid journey and after checking the passport and the visa, the respondent Air India International had issued ticket to her to undertake the journey from Ahmedabad to London (Heathrow Airport) via Mumbai. When the appellant reached Heathrow Airport, the concerned authorities at the Airport found that the appellant did not hold a valid visa in accordance with the immigration rules of U.K. and therefore. she was not permitted to enter the country and was ordered to be deported back to India. The officers of the Air India International were asked by the authorities at the Heathrow Airport to send the appellant back to India and thereupon she was brought back to India from Heathrow Airport by Air India International flight. It is the case of the appellant that she had not purchased any ticket for the return journey nor any ticket was given to her by the Air India International and that she was only given a boarding pass to board the flight for return journey. The respondent Air India International withheld the passport of the appellant because she did not pay the fare for her journey back to India from Heathrow Airport.

(2.) The appellant, therefore, preferred Special Civil Application No. 8772 of 1997 before this Court with a prayer that the respondent Air India International may be directed to return the passport as well as the fare which she had paid for her journey from Ahmedabad to Heathrow Airport via Mumbai. It is also pointed out that till the arrangements were made for her return to India, a temporary visa for a period of three days was given to her and during this period of three days. she stayed with her son in U.K. The appellant also claimed a sum of Rs. 1.50 lacs as damages for the stress, tension and mental agony which she suffered. The appellant's case is that it was the duty of Air India International to thoroughly check the visa and other papers before issuing the ticket and see as to whether all the papers regarding visa were in accordance with the immigration rules of U.K. or not and that the Air India International had failed to discharge this duty and it is this failure which has resulted into the suffering of the appellant and in any case there was no justification for the Air India International to withhold the passport of the appellant and that the passport could be withheld only by the Central Government and that too for valid reasons.

(3.) The learned single Judge has rejected the petition on the basis that the proper forum for adjudication of this type of grievance was the civil Court. It has also been observed by the learned single Judge that the question as to whether the respondent could withhold the passport of the petitioner on account of the claim for money of more than Rs. 1 lac could be considered and decided by the appropriate civil Court and that such disputed questions could not be gone into and decided under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.