The judgment established that while the airline's actions did not constitute deficiency in service, extenuating circumstances can influence the court's decision in upholding certain aspects of the complaint.

ORDER

Mrs. Vineeta Rai, Member - National Aviation Company of India Ltd. and others (hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner ) have filed this revision petition against the order of the State Commission in Appeal No. 518 of 2007 which had upheld the order of the District Forum in favour of R.K. Agarwal and others (hereinafter referred to as the Respondents ) who were original complainants before the District Forum.

2. The facts of the case are that Respondents/Complainants had purchased 10 tickets for Rs. 17,884 from Petitioner/Airlines for travel from Delhi to Indore by Flight No. 7134 departing on 24.11.2002 to attend a family function as also a business conference. However, when the Respondents reached the Airport, they were told by the officials of the Petitioner/Airlines that only some of the 10 passengers can be accommodated on the scheduled flight and the remaining passengers would be accommodated in another flight on the next date. Since the Respondents had planned to visit Indore for a specific function which required their travelling together as a family group, they did not board that flight and thereafter getting no sympathetic response to their grievance to refund their money from the Petitioner/Airlines, Respondents filed a complaint before the District Forum on grounds of deficiency in service and requested that Petitioner/Airlines be directed to pay Respondents, Rs. 17,884 along with interest 24% per annum, Rs. 10 lakh towards the damages for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000 as litigation costs.

3. Petitioner on being served admitted that the Respondents did have 10 confirmed tickets but stated that since Respondents arrived only 18 minutes prior to the departure of the flight instead of the statutory 30 minutes during which time 3 wait-listed passengers were accommodated, it was not possible to accommodate all the 10 Respondents on this flight. However, Petitioner/Airlines managed to issue 9 boarding passes and also stated that Respondents were assured that the remaining one passenger would be put on a flight to Indore the next day but they declined the offer. There was therefore, no deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioner/Airlines since in "No Show" cases refunds are not entertained and in fact it was the Respondents who erred in not reaching the Airport before the stipulated time for boarding the flight.

4. The District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the Petitioner/Airlines to return the air fare including all charges and taxes amounting to Rs. 17,884 as well as Rs. 3,000 to each Respondent toward compensation and litigation cost within a period of 30 days from the date of order.

Aggrieved by this order, Petitioner/Airlines filed an appeal before the State Commission which dismissed the appeal by observing as follows:

"We have deprecated the practice of the airlines to refuse boarding of the passengers with confirmed status of the ticket even if they report 1/2 hour before scheduled time for security purpose etc. This amounts to unfair trade practice as on the one hand they refuse to refund the amount of tickets to those passengers who did not report in time and on the other hand allow the other passengers from the waiting list to travel by the same, thereby ending up with double amount for one seat. It amounts to becoming unjustly rich."

5. Hence, the present revision petition. Counsel for both parties made oral submissions. Proxy Counsel for Petitioners vehemently argued that the Fora below erred in concluding that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Petitioner/Airlines because as per the Tariff Manual dealing with the various terms and conditions of airlines tickets, it is clearly stated in Section 5.3 under the heading "No Show" that passengers who fail to report 30 minutes before the scheduled time of departure will not be issued boarding passes and will also not be entitled to any refund except PSF and IATT. The 10 passengers (Respondents) who were admittedly inf