ORDER

Rohit Kumar Singh, Member—These Revision Petitions have been filed against the common impugned Order dated 07.12.2017 passed by the Ld. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh in Cross Appeal Nos. 2682 of 2016 and 1828 of 2016, vide which the Order of the Ld. District Forum was modified.

2. These Revision Petitions arise from the common impugned Order based on the same Complaint, therefore these Petitions are being disposed of by this common Order. However, for the sake of convenience, RP No. 256 of 2018 is treated as the lead case.

3. The factual circumstances leading up to the present Petition are that the Complainant/Respondent who is a resident of Lucknow, faced an extremely distressing and urgent situation when her husband suffered a severe heart attack on 25.07.2011. Following initial treatment at Lari Cardiology, K.G. Medical College, Lucknow, the doctors conducted a coronary angiography on 28.07.2011, which revealed two critically blocked arteries. The hospital administration emphasized the need for an immediate bypass surgery within 2-3 days to avoid another life-threatening heart attack. Given the lack of necessary facilities locally, the family decided to airlift the patient to Fortis Escorts Heart Institute (FEHI) in New Delhi. The Complainant searched online for air ambulance services and contacted Air Ambulance Aviation/Petitioner whose contact details were provided on their website. The Petitioner assured prompt and professional service to transport the patient. After initial negotiations, the Petitioner quoted Rs.1,90,000/- to airlift the patient from Lucknow to Delhi, following a shared flight arrangement with another patient from Bangalore. The Complainant was informed that Rs.50,000/- had to be paid immediately to secure the booking, with the remaining Rs.1,40,000/- to be transferred later. Trusting their assurances, the Complainant transferred Rs.50,000/- to the company’s account by 1:00 PM on 29.07.2011 and emailed the patient’s medical summary as requested. Subsequently, Rs.1,40,000/- was transferred by 4:00 PM via NEFT. Despite these payments and assurances from the company, the promised flight at 7:00 PM never arrived.

4. The Complainant, along with her critically ill husband, reached the Lucknow airport at the designated time, only to receive last-minute postponements from the company. The flight was rescheduled to 3:00 AM, and then to the morning of 30.07.2011, creating immense anxiety and stress. The Complainant repeatedly contacted the company, but their responses were vague and evasive. Meanwhile, the patient was discharged from the ICU based on the initial flight schedule, which exposed him to significant health risks due to the lack of adequate medical supervision outside the hospital. The situation deteriorated further when the company representatives proposed transporting the patient on a routine commercial flight instead of the promised air ambulance. This suggestion was wholly unsuitable, given the patient’s critical condition. Realizing that the company had no intention of fulfilling their contractual obligations, the Complainant was left with no choice but to cancel their services. At 1:02 AM on 30.07.2011, the Complainant sent an email formally cancelling the arrangement. To ensure her husband’s survival, she arranged for a road ambulance to transport him to Delhi, incurring additional expenses and enduring significant emotional distress.

5. The Complainant alleges that the Petitioner engaged in fraudulent practices by accepting Rs.1,90,000/- in advance while failing to deliver the promised service. The Petitioner’s conduct, characterized by repeated false assurances and a lack of accountability, placed the patient’s life in grave danger. Further inquiries revealed that the company was not registered with the Civil Aviation Authority of India, raising serious concerns about their legitimacy. Despite multiple reminders and written communications to the company and t