IMPORTANT POINT
Appropriate compensation is to be given to the complainant if consumer complaint is filed.

ORDER

None is present on behalf of the respondents though notices have been served to both the respondents, therefore, they are proceeded ex parte.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has been heard. She states that the respondent/ complainant had booked an Air India flight ticket from Delhi to Mumbai for 27th May 2012 for Rs.4640/-. The flight was cancelled due to the strike of the pilots. As the respondent no.1/ complainant had purchased the ticket from respondent no.2, however, he had not given any telephone number or e mail address, therefore, he could not get the information about the cancellation of the flight. Respondent no.1 has filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Faridabad (‘the District Forum’) being CC no. 380 of 2012 for refund of the ticket as well as compensation for mental agony and harassment. The complaint was resisted by the opposite party/ petitioner herein by filing the written statement stating the fact that the flight was cancelled due to the strike of the pilots. However, the District Forum vide its order dated 14.07.2016 allowed the complaint and directed OP to pay as under:

1. Rs.4640/- along with interest @ 9% from the date of journey to its realisation;

2. Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment, mental tension and agony; and

3. Rs.5100/- as litigation cost.

3. Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the opposite party/ petitioner herein filed an appeal before the State Commission being FA no.828 of 2016. The State Commission vide its order dated 17.05.2017 dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of the District Forum.

4. Hence, the present revision petition.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who states that as per DGCA rules, if the flight is cancelled due to a reason beyond the control of the Airline such as pilots’ strikes, the Airlines is not bound to pay any compensation to the passengers.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of this Commission in the case of M/s Emirates (Airlines) vs. Raj Kumar Sharma through Attorney Ashutosh Kaushash in FA No. 473 of 2009 decided on 23.05.2014. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inter Globe Aviation Ltd. vs. N Satchidanand in CA No. 4925 of 2011 decided on 04.07.2011 wherein no compensation has been provided due to inconvenience to a passenger on account of delay. The relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced below:

“There can be no doubt that the respondent, like any other passenger forced to sit a narrow seat for eleven hours, underwent considerable physical hardship and agony on account of the delay. But it was not as a consequence of any deficiency in service, negligence or want of facilitation by the appellant. Consumer Fora and permanent Lok Adalats cannot award compensation merely because there was inconvenience or hardship or on grounds of sympathy. What is relevant is whether there was any cause of action for claiming damages, that is whether there was any deficiency in service or whether there was any negligence in providing facilitation. If the delay was due to reasons beyond the control of the airline and if the appellant and its crew acted reasonably and in a bona fide manner, the appellant cannot be made liable to pay damages even if there has been some inconvenience or hardship to a passenger on account of the delay”.

7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and examined the record. The ticket was purchased for Rs.4640/-. The opposite party in their written statement has taken a stand right from the very beginning that the flight was cancelled due to the strike of pilots’ and it was beyond the control of the OP and it was a force majeure condition. Therefore as per the DGCA guidelines, the complainant is not entitled for any relief.

8. Provisions of section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986