CHETAN SHAH Vs. PEERLESS TRAVELS P LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant has filed this complaint for obtaining following reliefs :

(2.) THE basis of the complaint as alleged by the complainant is issuance of one ticket for. 28.4.1995 for travel from Ahmedabad to Bhuj. The ticket number stated by the complainant is 5196204 and was in waiting list. It has been alleged that later on it was confirmed by the opponent No. 1. Accordingly, the complainant reached the airport on 28.4.1995 but to his shock he was informed that he was on waiting list and the ticket in question would not be confirmed. The complainant has alleged that all that has happened on account of negligence on the part of opponent No. 1. The complainant could not travel by the same flight as he was supposed to travel (with Shree Suresh Mehta). He, therefore, came back from the airport and contacted opponent No. 1 at its counter at Hotel Shalin where the complainant had dropped. It has been alleged that opponent No. 1 orally apologised for the mistake and negligence but thereafter he was insulted and rudely treated. The complainant had therefore, to travel by taxi during night hours and that caused him a lot of pain and tension. On 9.5.1995, the complainant gave a notice to the opponents. He has alleged that he received letter dated 15.5.1995 in which opponent No. 1 expressed regrets without courtesy. According to him the turn over of the Company wherein he was the Managing Director ran into 50 lakhs of rupees in the previous year and on account of his unforeseen absence from the place of work he lost business worth Rs. 5 lakhs as the could not deal with the Industries and Finance Minister Shree Suresh Mehta. The complainant gave reply to letter dated 15.5.1995 and has alleged that he has suffered irreparable loss since he should be treated as consumer within he meaning of that word as contained in Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Act for short). He has prayed for aforesaid reliefs in this complaint filed on 25.9.1995.

(3.) FOLLOWING questions arise for our consideration and determination from the aforesaid pleadings :