SpiceJet asked to pay Rs 25,000 compensation to passenger for issuing wrong ticket
_vb_71.jpeg)
Mumbai (PTI): A consumer commission here has held that a senior citizen suffered "monetarily and mentally" after SpiceJet issued incorrect tickets while rerouting his journey in 2020, and directed the airline to pay a compensation of Rs 25,000 to the passenger.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban), in the order passed on June 17, held the budget carrier guilty of "deficient service and negligent behaviour" for the error which caused "mental harassment" to the passenger.
In view of the urgent need of the passenger (age not specified in the order), the airline had made an alternate booking- where the wrong ticket was issued- after his initial flight was cancelled due to bad weather.
The commission acknowledged that the flight cancellation was beyond the control of the airline, and the Air Traffic Control (ATC) had taken the decision in view of the passengers' safety.
It noted the airline had taken all the necessary efforts to provide an alternate ticket to the complainant,
However, the said ticket was incorrect and thereby the complainant suffered "monetarily and mentally", it said.
The commission further stated the complainant also "acted negligently".
"Had the complainant checked the ticket when it was issued, the mistake could have been rectified on the spot and the complainant could have saved himself from further hardship," it said.
The complainant, a senior citizen residing in Ghatkopar area here, booked Spicejet tickets from Mumbai to Darbhanga for December 5, 2020, and a return journey two days later.
While the Mumbai to Darbhanga leg of the journey was completed, the return flight was cancelled due to bad weather.
The complaint said as he had to appear for a PhD online examination in Mumbai on December 8, 2020, he requested an alternate arrangement.
SpiceJet then provided an alternate ticket for travel from Patna to Kolkata and then Kolkata to Mumbai on the same day.
However, upon reaching Patna, airport authorities informed him that the issued tickets were incorrect, as the connecting flight from Kolkata to Mumbai was scheduled to depart before his arrival in Kolkata, the complaint claimed.
This error forced the complainant to book another flight for the following morning at his own expense, causing significant hardship, mental agony and financial loss.
In such a situation, he also missed his online examination due to delayed arrival in Mumbai, the complainant said.
Hence, the man approached the consumer panel, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on part of the airline.
He sought a refund of the fare amount of Rs 14,577 along with a compensation of Rs 2 lakh for mental agony and Rs 25,000 as the cost of litigation.
SpiceJet, in its defense, argued the flight cancellation was due to bad weather, an instance beyond its control, and its liability is limited as per the Carriage by Air Act, 1972.
The airline stated that an alternate flight was provided without additional charges and the full ticket amount had been refunded to the complainant through his booking agency.
The commission noted the flight cancellation was "beyond the control" of the airline.
It stressed that the flight cancellation had genuine reasons and the ATC took the decision in the interest of passenger safety.
The airline had taken all the necessary efforts to provide alternate tickets to the complainant. However, the said ticket was incorrect, it observed.
The opposite party (airline), after realising the mistake, reimbursed the complainant.
"Hence, the opposite party had taken suo motu efforts to cover the financial damage to the complainant," the commission held.
It, however, underlined that the airline cannot escape from the negligent act of issuance of wrong ticket to the complainant.
"Hence, in our opinion, the opposite party is guilty of deficient service and negligent behaviour by issuing incorrect ticket, which threw the complainant in an unwarranted mental harassment," the commission ruled.
It held that the complainant deserves to be compensated for the said mental agony as well as legal expenses.
Hence, the commission directed the airline pay the passenger Rs 25,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 5,000 for the litigation cost.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
AIITA welcomes Karnataka’s ban on obscene songs in school events
Bhatkal: The Karnataka unit of the All India Ideal Teachers Association (AIITA) has welcomed the Karnataka government’s decision to strictly ban school children from dancing to obscene songs during educational and cultural programmes in government, aided, and private schools across the state.
AIITA Karnataka State President M. R. Manvi congratulated the government for taking what he termed an important step to preserve the sanctity of education.
“Such decisions to safeguard the dignity of school children and uphold the values of education are the need of the hour. This rule should not be limited to government schools alone but must be strictly implemented in all private educational institutions as well,” he said.
He further urged the government to address other concerns within school programmes.
“The government should not only prohibit obscene dances in the name of school anniversaries, but also ensure that plays and dialogues that incite religious hatred are avoided. Schools should be centres of harmony, not platforms for spreading hatred,” he added.
According to a recent circular issued by the Department of School Education and Literacy, obscene dances are adversely affecting the mental health and moral values of students.
In this regard, schools have been advised to use songs that promote nationalism, positive thinking, the greatness of Kannada culture, and value-based traditions instead of inappropriate content during programmes.
The circular also emphasises that students should be dressed in decent attire.
AIITA also backed the department’s warning that disciplinary action would be taken against head teachers if such guidelines are violated. The association has further demanded that district Deputy Directors of Public Instruction strictly monitor the implementation of these rules.
