T RAJENDRA PRASAD Vs. AIR INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant is the Executive Director of Jagruti Exports and Imports Ltd. , which deals in all types of exports and imports. He was to go to Durban for business meetings. For that he approached M/s. Gay Travels Pvt. Ltd. , the 3rd opposite party at Madras to book the tickets. They booked the tickets in Air India on the route Bombay/ Durban/bombay. The complainant reached Durban on 7.12.1994. After his work was over at Durban he approached the opposite parties the officials of Air India at Durban on 10.12.1994 to confirm the return ticket. He was informed that confirmation was available only on 14.12.1994 to which he agreed. When he reached the Airport on that day the officials of the 1st opposite party Air India informed him that the flight was cancelled and told him that he could board the Air India Flight on 16.12.1994. He requested them to book him in some other flight to India on that day. But they refused. Therefore there being no other alternative he agreed to board the flight on 16.12.1994. The complainant was asked to stay at Durban at his own expense for 2 days from 14.12.1994 to 16.12.1994 and he stayed in a hotel. On 16.12.1994 he went to the Airport and again the officials there informed him that the Air India Flight was cancelled and he was told to proceed to the Air India Office at Durban which was 10 to 15 kms. outside the Airport complex. He requested the officials to put the complainant on any of the flights to India via Nairobi, Adis-Ababa, Mauritius or Dubai in any one of the airlines but they never heeded and instead they issued 3 coupons on the following routes : 1. On 17th December, 1994 from Durban to Johannesburg by Comair.

(2.) On 17th December, 1994 Johannesburg to London by British Airways.

(3.) On 18th December, 1994 from London to Bombay by Air India. He was accommodated in a hotel in Durban by the opposite party from 16.12.1994 till 17.12.1994. On 17.12.1994 he proceeded to board Comair Flight to reach Johannesburg. The complainant was shocked when the authorities of Comair refused to accept and honour the Air India coupon. Further they told the complainant to buy a fresh ticket from Comair. He was without South African Rands currency to pay and purchase tickets, but he borrowed rands and with that he purchased tickets and reached Johannesburg at 2 p. m. on 17.12.1994. There he was forced to remain in the Air Port for 7 hours to board in the British Airways at Johannesburg to London. The complainant reached London on 18.12.1994 after 12 hours of flying and after crossing many time zones. As he was too tired to further travel he requested the officials of Air India to give a break of journey at London for a day but they refused. Then he requested the officials to put him in a direct flight to Bombay and that was also refused. He reached Delhi on 18.12.1994 mid night and there he was forced to remain in the aircraft for 3 hours before proceeding to Bombay. He finally reached Bombay on 19.12.1994 at 5 a. m. after completing 43 hours of flying and transit of Airports. All this happened because of the gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant lost export orders and also the goodwill and confidence of foreign buyers. Since he arrived India 5 days behind schedule he lost business opportunities in India and South Africa. Besides damage and hardship suffered by the complainant, his health also deteriorated. To a letter dated 16.1.1995 written by the complainant requesting them to investigate and inform the complainant, the 1st opposite party wrote a reply on 19.1.1995 apologising for the inconvenience. Though 4 months had elapsed they had not done anything. On these allegations the complainant has asked for a relief in money under different heads all totalling to Rs.8,38,000/-.2. In the written version the opposite parties 1 and 2 contended that at Durban the complainant booked his ticket for travel back to Bombay on flight AI/214/14.12.1994 but unfortunately the flight was cancelled and he was offered confirmed reservation on the subsequent flight AI/218 on 16.12.1994. Unfortunately this flight was also cancelled and the opposite parties at Durban rebooked him as follows : mn624 18/12/94 DUR /jnb baopen 18/12/94 JNB/lon a1112 19/12/94 LON/bom the Airlines M/s. Comair (MN) by which he was to travel Durban/johannesburg made a mistake by refusing to accept Air India ticket for his travel on the sector-DUR/jnb wrongly thinking that there was no prorata agreement between MN and AI. The complainant did not refer back to Air India but instead he had chosen to buy a separate ticket for his travel DUR/jnb. The opposite party were not aware of the status of the complainant or for the purpose for which he booked AI ticket on the sector Bombay/durban/bombay. The opposite parties are not aware that the complainant stayed in Durban hotel for two days at his own expense. The opposite parties deny that the complainant suffered loss of business or any other damage. There has been no negligence on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant is not entitled to any amount as claimed.3. The point that arises for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and if so, what relief can be granted to the complainant.