KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD Vs. LATA SIKRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the appellant/OPs against the order, dated 26.9.2011 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -I, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be called as District Forum only) in complaint case No. 603 of 2010 vide which, it allowed the complaint in the following manner;

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case, are that the complainant booked Air ticket for Bidar via Hyderabad of Kingfisher Airlines in flight No.IT -802 dated 30.5.2010 through Airpak Travels Chandigarh, which was scheduled to take off at 0925 from Delhi and was to arrive at Hyderabad at 1135 hrs. She also booked the return ticket of 3rd June, 2010 from Hyderabad to Delhi and Delhi to Chandigarh in flight No,9W2258 and 9W 733 of Jet Airlines consecutively. It was stated that at the Airport the OPs issued boarding pass to all her male colleagues but she was denied the issuance of boarding pass. The complainant made request to the OPs to issue her the boarding pass but to no effect and the flight took off. It was further stated that, ultimately, the boarding pass of another Airlines i.e. Spice Jet, was issued, which was scheduled to depart in the late hours at 1545 hrs and was to arrive at Hyderabad at 1800 hrs. She was given in writing that the ear would be provided by Hyderabad Airport Authority for Bidar. It was further stated that the Airport authority provided her a taxi but the driver of the said car took her to a wrong direction and took 6 hours to reach the destination which caused a lot of fear and insecurity to her. The complainant wrote a letter, to this effect, to the Kingfisher Airlines and they regretted the inconvenience. They offered the complainant complimentary return ticket on Kingfisher Airlines which could be used for any of their flights on domestic route. Despite harrowing experience, the complainant did not want to drag the matter further and made an offer to the Airlines, if it offered a package of 3 people (me, husband and son) for a week to any destination, in India, then it could be considered. But the same was not considered by the OPs. It was further stated that the aforesaid acts of the OPs, amounted to deficiency, in service, and indulgence into unfair trade practice. Hence, the complaint was filed.

(3.) REPLY was filed by the OPs, wherein, it was stated that the complainant availed of the services of the OPs against consideration paid by her. It was further stated that the complainant was intimated regarding the delay of flight and when she reported for check in, all seats on the said flight were released and she could not be accommodated. However, the complainant was provided seat in Spice Jet Flight. She was also provided surface transport from Hyderabad to Bidar with driver who was well aware of the route. It was admitted that e -mail from the complainant regarding her grievance was received, and as a gesture of goodwill she was offered complimentary tickets, which were refused by her. It was further stated that as per DGCA guidelines, Airlines are permitted to overbook the flights by a few seats and, as such, boarding is granted on first come first served basis. Hence the complainant was denied boarding due to overbooking which is a common practice, followed by most of the Airlines. All other allegations, levelled by the complainant, in the complaint, were denied. It was further stated that there was no deficiency, in service, on the part of the OPs nor they indulged into unfair trade practice.