SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

R.N.MANICKAM, RAMANI MATHURANAYAGAM, S.A.KADER
K. SENTHILRAJAN – Appellant
Versus
MALAYSIA AIRLINES – Respondent


ORDER

Mr. Justice S.A. Kader, President—This is a complaint under Sec. 17 read with Sec. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

2. The complainant is a Doctor holding a M.B.B.S. Degree from the University of Madras. He applied for and got admission for the examination in Part I of Foreign Medical Graduate Examinations in Medical Sciences of U.S.A. held in Singapore on the 19th and 20th January of 1993. He approached the third opposite party in the first week of December 1992 to secure to him a confirmed ticket for travel to Singapore on 17th January 1993 and return on 21.1.93. On 29.12.92, the complainant paid to the third opposite party a sum of Rs. 10,200/-for the said purpose. The third opposite party issued a ticket to the complainant which has been supplied by the second opposite party dated 30.12.92 for flight to Singapore by the first opposite party Malaysia Airlines on 17.1.93 and for return on 21.1.93. The flight was Madras-Kuala Lampur-Singapore-Kaula Lampur-Madras. The ticket showed that all the segments were confirmed and marked as O.K. On 17.1.93 when the complainant went to the Airport at Madras for boarding the plane which has to leave at 23.55 hours, he was informed by th


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top