Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 193 (KAR)

Inter Globe Aviation Limited v. A. N. Mahesh

2022-02-11

ALOK ARADHE, M.G.S.KAMAL

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ of certiorari for the quashment of order dtd. 24/5/2019 as well as order dtd. 20/6/2019 passed by District Consumer Forum as well as Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. In order to appreciate the petitioners challenge to the impugned order relevant facts need mention which are stated infra. 2. The petitioners are a low cost airline operator which undertakes scheduled commercial flights to various destinations within India and abroad under the name and style of 'Indigo'. The Respondent No.1 booked an air ticket for his travel on 5/12/2016 from Bangalore to Delhi. The Respondent No.1 carried a power bank in his check in baggage which was identified by the security personnel at the Kempegowda International Airport during the screening. Accordingly, the checked-in baggage was not allowed to be embarked into the aircraft. 3. The Respondent No.1, thereupon, filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum on 8/5/2018. The petitioners filed their written response and the matter was posted for the evidence of the complainant. The complainant was examined as PW1 on 27/3/2019. The petitioners prepared the evidence affidavit of its witness and the same was sent by courier to Bangalore. The petitioners sought to file the examination in chief of their witness by way of affidavit, however, the District Forum refused to take the affidavit evidence on record unless the witness is personally present. The matter was adjourned to 24/5/2019. On the aforesaid date, the witness of the petitioners was present and the petitioners sought to file an affidavit stating that it would not take the affidavit evidence on record on the ground that it was too lengthy. However, in the order sheet, the aforesaid was not recorded and the matter was adjourned to 19/6/2019. 4. The petitioners preferred a revision before the State Commission which was dismissed by an order dtd. 20/6/2019. The petitioner, thereupon, filed an application for adjournment before the District Forum on 21/6/2019, which was dismissed by the District Forum. In the aforesaid factual background, this petition has been filed. 5. 4. The petitioners preferred a revision before the State Commission which was dismissed by an order dtd. 20/6/2019. The petitioner, thereupon, filed an application for adjournment before the District Forum on 21/6/2019, which was dismissed by the District Forum. In the aforesaid factual background, this petition has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the relief for a direction to the Respondent No.4 and 5 to frame suitable guidelines for the conduct of the proceeding under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 does not survive for consideration as the aforesaid Act has been repealed. It is further submitted that the District Consumer Forum has denied the opportunity to the petitioners to tender evidence and the petitioners are ready and willing to file affidavit by way of examination-in-chief and shall keep the witness present before the District Forum for cross examination on such date as may be fixed by this court. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 has fairly not opposed the aforesaid prayer. 6. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record. The District Consumer Forum should have given an opportunity to the petitioners to tender the evidence. Every litigant has to be given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself/itself in a proceeding. While passing the impugned orders the State Commission as well as the District Forum have adopted a hyper technical approach. The impugned orders dtd. 24/5/2019 as well as order dtd. 20/6/2019 passed by District Consumer Forum as well as Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum are hereby quashed. The petitioners are directed to file the examination-in-chief by way of affidavit on 7/3/2022 and shall keep their witness present on 7/3/2022 for cross-examination. The examination-inchief which may be tendered by the petitioners shall be taken on record and their witness shall be crossexamined on 7/3/2022 by the Respondent No.1. The District Forum thereafter, shall proceed to deal with the matter expeditiously in accordance with law. 7. It is made clear that relief claimed by the petitioners to frame guidelines suitable guidelines for the conduct of the proceeding under the Consumer Protection Act is kept open to be agitated in an appropriate proceeding.