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 the first opposite party’s staff mat his ticket was not confirmed and he was only wait listed and there was no seat available. When the complainant expressed his urgency to go to Singapore for the examination to be held on 19th and 20th January, he was advised to purchase an Executive Class Ticket. The complainant had put to much mental pain and agony. He borrowed money from his friends and purchased a fresh executive class ticket and paid fresh airport tax of Rs. 300/- for travel from Madras-Kuala Lampur-by executive class and thereafter from Kuala lampur-Singapore by economic class. On arrival at Singapore on 18.1.93 he approached the first opposite party’s counter for confirmation for his return flight. He was told that as the ticket was not used for onward journey, it could not be availed of for the return trip. The complainant, was deeply worried and spent sleepless night. He wrote his examinations on 19.1.93 and 20.1.93 in high tension and pressure as a result of which he failed in the examination held on 19.1.93. On 21.1,93 he approached the first opposite party officer at Singapore and strongly protested against not allowing him to return to India by the same ticket. When he threatened to commit suicide in Singapore, the first opposite party Malaysia Airlines Officials confirmed his flight ticket to Madras on 26.1.93 on his original ticket. The complainant was forced to stay at Singapore till 26.1.93 making hand to mourn existence. He had to beg and borrow money from persons in Singapore. The difficulties experienced by the complainant are the direct results of the deficiency of service and negligence on the part of the opposite parties. He has therefore filed this complaint claiming compensation in the sum of Rs. 7,30,000/- on various heads.

3. The first opposite party Malaysia Airlines denied that there was deficiency of service or negligence on its part. It is pointed out that Travel Agents are appointed by the International Air Transport Association shortly known as IATA and this IATA approved Travel Agents get tickets in bulk from the Airlines on credit and sell them to passengers. The Travel Agents are expected to follow Resolution 830 (b) strictly. He should inform the Member Airlines and ensure the availability of the seat. Till the seat is confirmed, the Travel Agent has to keep the passenger in the waiting list. Once the Airlines confirms the availability of the seats the agent will be asked to furnish the ticket number of the particular passenger within the stipulated time which is called as “Ticketing Time Limit”. Upon confirmation of the ticket number, within the time, the seat will be confirmed by the Airlines. Once a seat is confirmed, the agent shall enter ‘OK’ in the status box of the Ticket Flight Coupon. The Opposite Party sha