INTERGLOBE AVIATION LTD Vs. P N GANESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order of the State Commission dated 30.08.2012 whereby the State Commission set aside the order dated 28.12.2010 of IV Addl. District Forum, Bangalore in complaint No.2175/2008 and remanded the matter back to the District Forum for rehearing the matter.

(2.) The facts relevant for the disposal of the revision petition are that respondent P.N.Ganesh filed a consumer complaint in District Forum Bangalore alleging that he was working as Police Sub-Inspector at Hosahalli Police Station Doddaballapur Taluk. He was entrusted with investigation of Crime Case No. 70/05 for offences under section 465, 468, 471, 489, 420 r/w Section 34 IPC alongwith Section 12 (3) of Indian Passport Act. In connection with the investigation, he went to Bombay and arrested the accused of the above noted case. Thereafter, he obtained transit remand from the Bombay Court and he was directed to produce the accused before the jurisdictional court at Bangalore on 29.08.2008. In order to comply with the directions of the Metropolitan Magistrate Bandra, Mumbai, the respondent complainant booked three flight tickets with the petitioner Airlines through travel agent M/s Prasad Travels, Shop No.1, Pooja Apt., Opp. Ram Mandir, Bhayandar (West), District Thane. On 26.08.2010 the complainant alongwith constable and the said accused approached the counter of the petitioner opposite party at Mumbai Airport but they were declined boarding passes. When the complainant asked for refund of the money, instead of refunding the amount of tickets, a credit advise was issued for Rs.12,225/- allowing the complainant to make use of the same for travel in the airlines of the opposite party within one year. According to the complainant, this amounts to deficiency in service.

(3.) In the first round of litigation, the District Forum allowed the complaint ex parte against the petitioner Airlines. Being aggrieved of ex parte order passed by the District Forum Bangalore, the petitioner preferred an appeal. The State Commission allowed the appeal vide order dated 26.08.2010, set aside the ex parte order passed by the District forum and remanded the matter back to the District Forum for fresh disposal of the complaint after giving opportunity to both the parties.