INDIAN AIRLINES CORPORATION Vs. ABDUL MAJID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -These are two cross appeals arising out of the order dated April 3,1992 passed by the State Commission, Madras allowing to the complainant Abdul Majid, a compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and costs of Rs. 1,000/- as against the Indian Airlines Corporation.

(2.) The complainant, Abdul Majid, who is a well known figure in the field of sports and a permanent office-bearer of the Indian Weight Lifting Federation had purchased from the Indian Airlines a wait listed ticket for travel from Madras to Cochin by Flight No. 1C-529 on October 9, 1991. On his reporting at the counter of the Madras Airport on the date of journey, after a short period of waiting, his wait listed ticket was confirmed along with those of two other wait listed passengers holding tickets for travel by the same flight and a boarding card was issued to him allotting seat No. 8E. Thereafter his baggage was checked in and after he went through the security check and completed the formality of identification of his baggage, he boarded the aircraft and occupied the seat allotted to him as per the boarding card. After about ten minutes, the Duty Officer of the Indian Airlines at the Madras Airport along with two other members of the Airline's staff came inside the aircraft and asked the complainant to get up from his seat and alight from the aircraft. According to allegations in the complaint on the complainant's declining to comply with the said demand, the officers of the Airlines forcefully took him out of the aircraft by dragging him down the ramp to the ground as a result of which the complainant's shirt was torn and he was publicly subjected to humiliating and insulting treatment. The two other wait listed passengers who had also given confirmation along with the complainant were also taken out from the aircraft and none of them was allowed to board the aircraft before it finally departed for Cochin. According to the version of the complainant, the seats vacated by the complainant and two others were then allowed to be occupied by three other passengers who were allowed to board the plane and proceed to Cochin. The complainant's baggage was not restored to him and in consequence he was stranded in Madras for two days without even any change of clothes and had to return to Cochin by alternative means incurring heavy expenditure. The complainant, therefore, prayed the State Commission for the award of Rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation for loss of reputation and for the mental and physical agony caused to him.

(3.) The version put forward on behalf of the Indian Airlines in the counter statement filed before the State Commission is that on the date in question there was a long queue at the concerned counter at the Madras airport where the passengers leaving for different flights were all included in the same queue since it was 'computerised checking in'. As a result, three passengers who had confirmed tickets and who were also standing in the queue could not reach the counter before the expiry of half an hour prior to the flight departure time despite the fact that they were present at the airport and were standing in the queue. It was under a wrong impression that the three passengers holding confirmed tickets had failed to show up within the stipulated time limit of half an hour before the departure time that the wait listed tickets of the complainant and two others were endorsed as confirmed. Soon thereafter, the persons with confirmed tickets came to the counter of the airport demanding boarding cards saying that they were all along standing in the queue. Since they have to be preferentially accommodated in the flight by rectifying the mistake of granting confirmation to a three wait listed passengers, the complainant and two others were requested to disembark from the plane after explaining the position to them. The complainant's allegation that physical force was applied for taking him out of the aircraft was denied in the counter. Relying upon Clause 4 of the Non-international (Carriage of Passengers and Baggage) Regulations, 1989 a plea was raised in the counter that the Indian Airlines Corporation has a right to decide which passenger or article shall be off load, and such decision shall be binding. On the basis of the above averments it was submitted on behalf of the Indian Airlines Corporation that there was no 'deficiency' in service on its part and the claim for compensation should, therefore, be rejected.