IMPORTANT POINT
When there are no illegalities in the orders of the lower fora, the revisional jurisdiction cannot be invoked.

Challenge in this Revision Petition under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short the “Act”) is to the order dated 22.02.2018 passed by the Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Agartala (for short “the State Commission.”) in FA No.53 of 2017, preferred by the Complainants and FA No.61 of 2017, preferred by the Opposite Party Airlines.

2. By the impugned order, the State Commission has dismissed the Appeal preferred by Indigo Airlines and partly allowed the Appeal preferred by the Complainant.

Briefly put, it was averred in the Complaint that Complainant Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4 are family members and were returning from Kolkata to Agartala through Opposite Party Airlines (hereinafter referred to as “Indigo Airlines”) and purchased air tickets vide PNR No.IHRNSE. It was stated that the subject flight i.e. Flight No.6E 861 was scheduled to depart on 08.01.2017, at 8.45 a.m. and that all the Complainants reported before the Indigo Airlines Counter at Kolkata Airport on 08.01.2017 and after observing all the formalities, the Airlines issued boarding passes in favour of all the Complainants. It was pleaded that the Airlines left all the Complainants at Kolkata Airport without informing them despite all the Complainants being in the Airport premises. A Written Complaint was lodged by Complainants No.1 and 2 at Indigo Office at Kolkata Airport but the office staff as well as the Airport staff at their counter, did not accept the Complaint Application and forcibly snatched away their boarding passes and further did not pay heed to their request for making alternate arrangements for their flight to Agartala. The Complainants were forced to return from Kolkata Airport as they did not have sufficient money to purchase fresh tickets and stayed in a hotel room and arranged money for purchasing new air tickets to return to Agartala.

3. It was averred that the Complainants paid an amount of Rs.4,500/- per day for accommodation, Rs.3,000/- per day for meals and had to stay at Kolkata on 08.01.2017 and on 09.01.2017 and only on 10.01.2017 the Complainants were able to purchase new tickets vide PNR No.JBHHGW and left to Agartala by Indigo Airlines 6E 861 on 10.01.2017. It was stated that the first and second Complainants are Engineers and Government Employees of Tripura and could not attend to their office on 09.01.2017 and on 10.01.2017 for which two days salary was also deducted and that the first and second Complainants were getting salary of Rs.1088/- and Rs.2081/- per day respectively and the third and fourth Complainants, who are students, could not attend to their respective schools which led to a lot of mental harassment and inconvenience to the Complainants, for which, the Complainants are claiming compensation. Complainants issued a legal notice dated 28.01.2017 to the Indigo Airlines but received no reply. Hence the Complainants approached the District Forum seeking directions to Indigo Airlines to pay Rs.16,432/- for air tickets; Rs.6338/- for two days salary of the first and second Complainants; Rs.20,000/- for loss of three days studies of the third and fourth Complainants; Rs.15,000/- for cost of the two days hotel charges and Rs.2,00,000/- towards mental agony, Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation and Rs.20,000/- towards costs along with interest and other reliefs.

4. Indigo Airlines resisted the Complaint denying all the allegations made in the Complaint but admitted the issuance of the tickets and the boarding passes. It was averred that the booking under consideration made by the Complainants were governed by ‘Indigo Conditions of Carriage-Domestic’ (hereinafter referred to as “Conditions of Carriage”). The Conditions of Carriage constitute a binding contractual agreement between the Complainant and the Opposite Party for Air Carriage as has been held in Civil Appeal No.4925 of 2011, M/s Interglobe Aviation Ltd. Vs. N. Satchidanand, (2011) 7 SCC 463. As per Article 8.1 of the Conditions of Carr