PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES Vs. BHAGWAN DUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Pakistan International Airlines has challenged the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission of Delhi, passed in CC No. C-181/1999. The State Commission has allowed the complaint of the respondent, holding that the appellant PIA was guilty of deficiency in service in terms of section 2 (1)(g) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. For the financial loss suffered, cost of the ticket, mental agony and cost of litigation, the Commission awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs 1 lakh in favour of the complainant.

(2.) The appeal has been filed with a delay of nine days which, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, is condoned. The facts in brief, are that the respondent/complainant, an Indian national, had been working in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia or several years. He was on a short visit to India, with his permission to re-enter Saudi Arabia ending on 19.12.1998. He had therefore obtained a confirmed ticket for 16.12.1998 from the Delhi office of the appellant/PIA. On the date of journey, the PIA cancelled the flight on the ground of heavy fog in Delhi. The case of the complainant is that he was taken to Karachi on 17 .12.1998 by PIA with the assurance that we will be provided a seat in the connecting flight on the same day to Riyadh. This did not happen. The complainant was kept by PIA in Karachi from the 17th to 22nd of December 1998 and then brought back to Delhi, on the ground that his permission to re-enter Saudi Arabia had expired on the 19th.

(3.) The case of the complainant before the State Commission, was that he had a confirmed ticket on the cancelled flight. It was therefore, the obligation of the PIA to ensure that he reaches Riyadh on the 17th. More importantly, it has been argued by complainant that the claim of the PIA that all flights from Delhi had to be cancelled on 16.12.1998 due to heavy fog is factually untrue. According to him certain other international flights, for example Saudi Airlines and the Gulf Airlines were able to fly out of the Delhi airport. The PIA should have refunded the cost of the cancelled flight, to enable him to travel by any other airline, so as to reach his destination in time. According to the complaint petition, the complainant spent another Rs.45,000/- and obtained fresh permission to enter Saudi Arabia but could not get his job back. This put him to a huge financial loss in terms of loss of arrears of pay, service benefits and continuation of employment.