AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS appeal is directed against the order passed by the District Forum, Thiruvananthapuram, in O.P. No. 619/93.
SHORTLY stated, the allegations in the complaint are follows : The complainant and her husband travelled from Madras to Sydney by Malaysia Air Lines on Maaras-Kulalampur - Sydney Kulalampur-Madras tickets purchased from the first Opposite Party through the second Opposite Party. A part of the ticket of the complainant''s husband was not utilised as he expired on 17th September, 1992 while in Sydney. So his body was transported to India by cargo service. The tickets were purchased by paying Indian Rs. 28,299/- and only part of the ticket purchased was used. The complainant was entitled to refund of Rs. 14,149.50. However, the Opposite Party repudiated the claim though refund was recommended by the first Opposite Party. It is on these allegations the complaint was filed seeking refund of the aforesaid amount and payment of compensation of Rs. 2,000/-. Opposite Parties 1 and 2 filed versions. It was contended that the ticket was booked at Bangalore and issued at Bangalore and the first Opposite Party is carrying on his business at Bangalore and the District Forum has no territorial jurisdiction. There were three types of booking of air tickets. Promotional/excursional, economical and business classes. Economical fare is approximately double the fare of promotions/ excursional fare. In the instant case Rs. 28,299/- was collected as promotional fare. At that time economical fare for one way was Rs. 31,382/- and the business class fare for one way was Rs. 35,996/-. Economical normal fare for ticket is valid for one year whereas the excursional fare tickets which is almost half of the normal fare is valid for a specified limited period only. The excursional/promotional fare tickets are only seasonal and in that case the full utilisation of the ticket is a must. Under the IATA regulations and Air Tariff general rules and regulations refund on unutilised coupons after the commencement of travel, in case of death of a passenger is available only if there is any difference which is in excess of the normal economical fare. In this case, the amount collected for 2 ways under the promotional fare basis is Rs. 28,299/- whereas the normal fare at that was Rs. 31,382/- for one way. Therefore, there was no excess and the complainant is not entitled to get any refund.
The District Forum held that it has got territorial jurisdiction as the ticket was purchased from the second Opposite Party at Thiruvananthapuram. As regards the merit, the District Forum held that the Opposite Party has not proved that Ext. P1 ticket is promotional/excursional or economical fare ticket. In that view an order was passed by the District Forum directing the Opposite Party to pay 50% of the air ticket fare Rs. 14,149.50 and also cost of Rs. 250/-.
AGGRIEVED by the said order this appeal has been preferred. The learned Counsel for the appellant challenged the finding entered by the District Forum. Learned Counsel invited our attention to Ext. P 1 where the class is described as ''M''. He took us to Ticketing Hand Book 28th Edition published by IATA page 19, where ''M'' has been described as economy/discounted class. In the circumstances there cannot be any doubt that the ticket issued is for economy/discounted class. The contention of the Opposite Party that the one way fare for Madras-Kualalampur-Sydney for Economic Class is Rs. 31,382/- and for business class is Rs. 35,996/- is not disputed. RW 1 has given evidence to this effect and his evidence stood uncontroverted. In the instant case for both ways the fare that was collected is only Rs. 28,299/- which is less than 50% of the actual fare to Madras-Kulalampur-Sydney and this has to be considered as discounted class. It is also seen from the ticket that it is valid upto 2nd December, 1992. That also indicates that the tickets belong to discounted class. This position is clarified in the Ticketing Hand Book referred to above in paragraph 1 : 22 : 2. Under the heading Individual Excursion Fare it is stated there must be an entry in the "Not valid After" boxes as the ticket does not have a normal validity. Involuntary refunds has been dealt with in Air Tariff published in October, 1996. At page 5, under the heading Involuntary Refunds contains the relevant statement (Clause 5B) and that is as follows : "If a portion of ticket has been used, the refund will be either an amount equal to the one-way fare less the same rate of discount, if any, that was applied in computing the original one-way fare (or nonrefund) trip or circle trip tickets, one-half of the round trip fare) and charges applicable to the unused transportation from the point of termination to the destination or stopover point name on the ticket or to the point at which transportation is to be resumed".
Applying the above principle to the instant case, the complainant is not entitled to get any refund since the total fare paid is less than one way fare to Madras-Kualalampur-Sydney ticket. That being the position, we are unable to sustain the order passed by the District Forum. We allow the appeal, set aside the order of the District Forum and dismiss the complaint. Appeal allowed. _____________