RADHA KINKARI KEJRIWAL 13 GURUSADAY ROAD, KOLKATA Vs. JET AIRWAYS (INDIA) LIMITED AND 2 OTHERS QUEEN MANSION, 18D PARK STREET. KOLKATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed under Sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, against the impugned order dated 28.3.2013, passed by the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission') in Appeal No. 319/2011, Jet Airways India Ltd. and others Vs. Radha Kinkari Kejriwal, vide which, while allowing the appeal, the order dated 23.5.2011, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit-I, Kolkata, allowing Consumer Complaint No.71/2010, filed by the present petitioner, was set aside and the complaint was dismissed.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainant who is a girl student, aged 20 years, studying at Cardiff University, U.K. booked a ticket with the OP/respondent Jet Airways in Flight No. 9W121 for travel on 9.12009 from London to Delhi, scheduled for departure at 2050 hrs. It has been stated in the consumer complaint that the complainant reached the Jet Airways Counter at London, Heathrow Airport, 70 minutes prior to the scheduled departure of Flight No. 9W121. However, the staff of the OP Airlines, refused to issue boarding pass to her on the plea that she failed to report at least 90 minutes prior to the scheduled departure of the flight. She was asked to wait beside the counter, but the said staff checked in five more passengers, who had come after the complainant, but still, they were issued boarding passes. The complainant was not allowed to travel by the said flight, and ultimately, she had to arrange an alternative air ticket of another flight, AI 188 of Air India for her travel to India on 10.12009 by spending an additional amount of Rs.83,292.00. The father of the complainant wrote a letter to OP-3, the Chairman of the Jet Airways, explaining the entire episode to him. Thereafter, a notice dated 16.12009 was also sent to OP-1, demanding explanation for the aforesaid act of the staff and their officers. The complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking directions to the OPs to refund the value of the Jet Airways ticket of Rs.62,178.00 and also to pay the amount of Rs.83,292.00 spent on the Air India flight taken from London and in addition, to allow damages of Rs.10 lakhs for mental harassment etc. and litigation cost of Rs.10,000.00.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the OPs by filing written statement before the District Forum, in which they stated that the check-in counter at London Heathrow Airport closes 75 minutes before the scheduled departure time of the flight and not 60 minutes as stated in the consumer complaint. However, as admitted by the complainant, she reported 70 minutes prior to the said departure and hence, she was late by 5 minutes. The complainant could not be accommodated on the said flight after the closure of that flight and hence, there was no deficiency in service on their part.