Jet Airways (India) LTD vs Vinod Kumar Kantha & 6 Ors

V.K. Jain, Presiding Member

The complainants/respondents, one of whom is a senior Advocate, travelled from Patna to Kolkata and from Kolkata to Chennai on Jet Airways on 24.11.2010. The flight from Patna to Kolkata was late but the complainants were allowed to board the flight which was to take them from Kolkata to Chennai though they had reached late for the purpose of boarding the plane.

On 26.11.2010 the complainants travelled from Patna to Kolkata on Indigo Airlines and were to travel from Kolkata to Patna on Jet Airways. The Indigo flight which was scheduled to leave Chennai at 1.15 p.m. was rescheduled and got delayed. The flight landed at Kolkata airport only at 4.55 p.m. The complainants claim to have reached the Luggage Booking Counter of Jet Airways at 5.22 p.m. after picking up their luggage from the conveyor belt. They, however, were not allowed to board the flight which was to take them from Kolkata to Patna and were informed that the counters had closed 45 minutes before the scheduled time of departure which was 6.05 p.m. The complainants, therefore, purchased tickets of Kingfisher Airlines for travelling from Kolkata to Patna which charged a higher fare from them. They also had to suffer cancellation charges amounting to Rs.750/- for each ticket. The flight from Kolkata to Patna, however, took off only at 6.40 p.m.

Being aggrieved, the complainants approached the concerned State Commission by way of a consumer complaint impleading both the Indigo Airlines as well as Jet Airlines as the opposite parties in the complaints.

The complaints were resisted by the petitioner as well as by Indigo Airlines who denied any deficiency on their part in rendering services to the complainants.

The State Commission vide its impugned order dated 22.5.2013 directed as under:-

"In the circumstances, the complaint filed by the complainant is hereby allowed. Considering the status and natural justice and harassment to the complainant, a total amount of Rs.22,20,580/-(Rs. Twenty two lacs twenty thousand five hundred and eighty only) for all claims will serve the purpose of justice, which will be paid within two months, failing which interest @ 9% per annum is to be paid by the OP."

Being aggrieved from the order passed by the State Commission, the Jet Airways is before this Commission by way of this appeal.

On the last date of hearing, it was informed that vide order dated 20.6.2019, NCLT had admitted a petition under Section 7 and 9 of IBC against the appellant company and a Moratorium in terms of Section 14 of the Code has been declared. Notice was, therefore, issued to IRP appointed for the appellant company. No one however is present for the IRP despite service of notice. I have, therefore heard the learned counsel for the complainants.

As far as the delay in Indigo flight which brought the complainants from Chennai to Kolkata on 26.11.2010 is concerned, on a perusal of the consumer complaint I find that the complainants are not making any grievance against the said Airlines and are not seeking to hold them responsible for their alleged loss. The thrust of their consumer complaint is directed against Jet Airways. Therefore, I need not go into the question as to whether there was any deficiency on the part of the Indigo Airlines in rendering services to the complainants or not.

Coming to the allegations against the appellant Jet Airways, the only grievance of the complainants is that while they were allowed to board the plane even when they were late, while traveling from Kolkata to Chennai on 24.11.2010, but such an accommodation was refused to them by Jet Airways on 26.11.2010, though the complainants were not in any manner responsible for reaching late at the baggage counter, their flight from Chennai to Kolkata having been considerably delayed.

It is not in dispute that as per the notification of Jet Airways, the passengers who were carrying check in baggage were required to reach the Jet Airways counter at least 45 minutes before the scheduled time of departure. It is also not in dispute that the appellants did not reach the counter in time, they even as per their own case having reached at 5.22 p.m. It is also pointed out in the written version filed by Jet Airways that the flight in which the complainants travelled from Chennai to Kolkata on 26.11.2010 had carried their luggage and according to the complainants they picked up the luggage from the conveyor belt at 5.20 p.m. and reached the booking counter at 5.22 p.m. which was impossible since the distance could not have been covered within two minutes. I however, need not go into the question as to whether the complainants had reached the Jet Airways counter at 5.22 p.m. as is alleged by them or after 5.30 p.m. as is alleged by Jet Airways since in either situation they had not reached 45 minutes before the scheduled time of departure. Jet Airways therefore, was not under an obligation to accept their check in baggage and permit them to board the flight from Kolkata to Patna. It has to be kept in mind that the flight which brought the complainants from Chennai to Kolkata was of a different airline. The position would be different if both the flights are of the same airlines, as against the position in a case where the two flights are operated by different airlines. In the former situation, the airlines being the same, they are expected to accommodate the passenger who reaches the counter on account of the flight operated by them itself having got delayed. On the other hand, in the second situation, they are not responsible for the delay in arrival of the first flight and, therefore, cannot be compelled to accept the check in baggage of the passenger who reports less than 45 minutes before the scheduled time of departure.

The learned counsel for the complainants relies upon the decision of this Commission in First Appeal No.164 of 2013 - Jet Airways (India) Ltd. Vs. Vandana Jain & Ors. decided on 9.7.2013. This judgement, however, would not be applicable since in this case both the flights were operated by Jet Airways whereas in the present case, the first flight i.e. the flight which took them from Chennai to Kolkata was operated by Indigo Airlines whereas the second flight which they were not allowed to board was operated by Jet Airways.

The State Commission held against the appellant on the ground that the appellant had not filed the Reservation Chart of the flight from Kolkata to Patna, to prove that the seats on which the complainants were to travel had remained unoccupied. Vide order dated 30.7.2014, the appellant was required by this Commission to place on record the Passenger Manifest for the flight in question. The said Passenger Manifest was filed and is available on record, the justification given by the State Commission for holding against the appellant does not survive any more.

For the reasons stated hereinabove, the impugned order cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set aside. The appeal stands allowed without any order as to costs.