HARSORIA HEALTHCARE PVT LTD Vs. ROYAL JORDANIAN AIRLINES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present complaint has been filed by five complainants namely, Harsoria Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. , a Company, Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Mrs. Sunanda Dutta, Ms. Mrinali Gupta and Master Pronnoy Gupta. The complainants No. 2 to 5 booked flight tickets from New Delhi to Amman for travel on 04.08.2014, Tel Aviv to Amman and Amman to New Delhi for journey on 14.08.2014. Their flight was cancelled from Tel Aviv to Amman on 14.08.2014 because of state of war in Israel. The complainants were given the option either to wait till 18.08.2014 for the flight from Tel Aviv to Amman or to travel from Tel Amman to Amman on their own and catch the Amman to Delhi flight on 14.08.2014. The complainants travelled on their own under difficult circumstances and managed to catch their flight on 14.08.2014. Consequently, they filed the complaint case before the State Commission with the following prayers: -

(2.) THE State Commission picked up a conflict with the amount of compensation demanded by the complainants in the sum of Rs.25,00,000/ - alongwith litigation costs in the sum of Rs.35,000/ -. The State Commission observed: -

(3.) DURING the Revision Petition, we have heard the counsel for the petitioners. It is clear that the compensation asked for by the complainants is on the higher side. It has no connection with the principal amount demanded in the sum of Rs.46,129/ - . The complainants have asked for a hefty compensation. Although, there lies no rub for the complainants to demand as much compensation as they think it to be proper, yet, there should be some basis for the same. There is a huge difference between the principal amount and the compensation asked for by the complainants. Normally the compensation asked for may be less or at the most equal amount of principal or twice or thrice of it.The complainants are asking for a special compensation in this case but they have not prima facie made any ground for the same. When we tried to ask the status of the family or income tax returns, the counsel tried to avoid these questions. How the Commission can allow fantasy to obscure reality. The Commission has to be empirical and practical in confronting reality.