Airlines preponed flight without notice how to proceed legally

741 votes

you can file a case in the consumer forum against them. in a similar case referred below the court had ordered compensation to the consumer. kindly go through the judgment

Brief facts of the case are that the complainant booked three Air Tickets of Spice Jet, on 23.10.2007 to travel from Delhi to Calcutta on 22.12.2007 for a sum of Rs. 9042/- . OP- 1 had given a confirmed ticket for Flight SG 607 on dt. 22.12.2007, bearing in Conformation No. QBQ3EQ, scheduled to depart from Delhi at 21:15 hrs. On basis of the aforesaid confirmed ticket, the Complainant further booked 4 tickets form Calcutta to Port Blair for 23.12.2007 for a sum of Rs. 29,480/-, 4 tickets form Port Blair to Madras for 29.12.2007 for a sum of Rs. 25,721/- and 4 tickets form Madras to Delhi for 29.12.2007 for sum of Rs. 15,487/- through OP- 1 that is M/S Max Travel, and in all paid Rs. 80,996/- to the OP- 1.

2) The grievance of the complaint is that on 22.12.2007, when the complainant reached to the domestic airport to take Flight SG 607, two hours before the departure of the Flight which was scheduled to depart at 21:15 hours within the prescribed period, the complainant was shocked to learn that the said Flight had been preponed to 19:30 hours and had already taken off. According to the complainant he had no other option but to book another Flight, Indigo, scheduled to take off at 22.25 hours Flight No. 6E205 at a cost of Rs. 28,572/-. It is alleged that OP- 1 failed to communicate to the Complainant about the pre-ponement of the Flight SG 607 form 21.15 hours to 19:30 hours. Similarly, OP- 2 also failed to intimate the Complainant about the re-scheduling of the Flight. This Act of the OPs amounts to deficiency of service for which the Complainant had to face mental agony. The complainant served a legal notice dated 14.01.2008 to the OPs calling upon them to pay a sum of Rs 28,572/- being the value of the tickets, because he was forced to purchase these to prevent further losses in the tour booked by him and further a sum of Rs 1,00,000/- as damages.

3) In reply to that notice, OP- 1 sent a false and frivolous reply to the complainant. Aggrieved by the said behavior of the OPs the complainant filed complaint before the District Forum with the prayer, to direct the Ops to jointly and severally pay a sum of Rs. 28,572/- being the cost of the tickets and Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment.

4) Notices were issued to OPs to file their written statement. In his written statement OP- 1 reiterated that at the time of the booking of the tickets for the complainant, OP- 1 has asked him to provide his Telephone/ Mobile/ E- Mail as reference no. which was suppose to be mentioned on the Booking Form/ Application Form of Airlines ticket, so that the Airlines can intimate the passengers about the scheduled of the departure (Preponement / Postponement ) of the Flight but the Complainant failed to provide the same. It is stated that instead of providing any reference nos., the Complainant asked OP 1 to fill up his own Mobile No. in the Booking Form/ Application Form and OP- 1 filled up his own Mobile No. in the Booking Form/ Application Form. OP- 1 also stated that it is responsibility of the passengers to keep in touch with the Airlines for checking the scheduled departure of the Flight. Further contention of the OP- 1 is that the envelop in which complainant had given all the Air Tickets, the following note was printed;

Please recheck departure time on the day of the Flight, it is advisable to re-check, reconfirm your onward return reservations, no refunds on loss of tickets.

5) It was stated that the Complainant had made neither contact with OP- 1 nor had bothered to go through the printed note. He even failed to make enquiry from OP- 2 regarding the said Flight and Complainants missed the Flight due to their own negligence.

6) OP- 2 also filed his written version wherein it was stated that the re-scheduleing/ pre-ponement of Flight is not in the hand of the OPs and it is the Air Traffic Controller which governs the same. Re-scheduling of the Flight is done due to various reasons viz. VIP movement, security reasons and other confidential reasons, best known to ATC. The OP- 2 further submits that due to the aforesaid reasons, the OP- 2 informs its passengers regarding preponment well in advance, at the E-Mail addresses, Mobile Phone Numbers etc. provided by the passengers in their booking forms. In the present case, OP- 2 came to know about the re-scheduling of the Flight on 12.12.2007 and on the same day, i.e. on 12.12.2007 itself they informed passengers about the re-scheduling on their E-Mail address as well as on the Telephone Numbers of concerned passengers. It is stated that the Complainant got the said tickets through OP- 1 and instead of giving his own particulars he gave the e-mail and mobile number of OP- 1. Accordingly OP- 2 had no other option, but to sent and SMS on Mobile NO. 9312230580 on 12.12.2007 at 11:01:40 a.m. and also sent an e-mail at 5:57 a.m. on 13.12.2007, while the Flight was scheduled on 22.12.2007, therefore, there is no fault or deficiency on part of the OP- 2. Thereafter the complainant filed his rejoinder and both the parties led their evidence.

7) The District Forum after hearing the arguments found the OPs guilty and deficient in service and directed the OPs to pay sum of Rs. 28,572/- to the Complainant along with interest @ 10% per annum form the date of filing of this complaint and Rs. 20,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment and cost of litigation.

8) Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the OP- 2 that is M/S. Spice Jet Ltd. filed this appeal before this Commission.

9) We have heard Sh. N.P. Singhvi, Counsel for the Appellant and Respondent- 1 in person and perused records.

10) It is admitted fact that the Respondent/ Complainant had booked three Airlines Tickets from Appellant (OP- 2) from Delhi to Calcutta for travel on 22.12.2007 for a sum of Rs. 9042/-. However due to certain reasons the Flight SG 607, was preponed. The Flight was scheduled to depart at 21:15 hours but was preponed to 19:13 hours. In the complaint the complainant said that he could not board the Flight because he had no information about the preponment of the Flight and he has to book another Flight of Indigo scheduled to take off at 22:25 hour at the cost of Rs. 28,572/-. The case of the complainant is that the Ops did not provide any information to the complainant about the preponment of the Flight. The only short question to be decided in this appeal is that whether the Appellant/ Ops informed the Complainant about the preponement of the Flight? The big answer is No. We have carefully gone through the record of this case and find no evidence given by the Appellant/ OP that they have informed the Complainant about preponment of the Flight.

11) It cannot be imagined that the complainant instead of giving his own particulars will give the particulars (E-mail, Mobile No.) of OP- 1 in the booking form. It is also evident from records that the decision of re-scheduling of the Flight was taken on 12.12.2007 where as the Flight was to take place on 22.12.2007 that is 10 days in advance. The OP have sufficient time to inform the Complainant about the re-scheduling of the Flight which they failed to do. The Appellant who was OP- 2 before the District Consumer Forum cannot wriggle out of its duty to inform the Complainant only by saying that it has not sent an SMS and E-mail on the contact provided by the Complainant in his Application Form/ Booking Form because the OP- 1 M/S Max Travels was his agent who filled his own Mobile No. and E-mail address in the Complainants form. It is the deficiency on the part of OP- 1 caused due to filling up of his own particulars in the booking form of the Complainant and not inform him above the preponement.

12) Now the Appellant cannot escape its liability to compensate the Complainant for the fault of the M/S Max Travels because M/S Max Travel is an agent of Spice Jet and the principal is liable for its Acts of its agent.

13) We, therefore, hold that the Appellant was deficient in providing services to the Complainant and found that there is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the District Forum.

14) The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

15) The copy of the order be made available to the parties free of cost as per law and thereafter file be consigned to record room.

16) FDR if any deposited by the Appellant shall be released as per rule.

Advocate Siddhant Sharma LawRato