Kochi: The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC), Ernakulam, has ordered Cochin International Airport Ltd to pay a passenger compensation of Rs 16,000 for not providing rain shelter.
CIAL has to pay compensation to the complainant, T G N Kumar, a native of Vennala, who sued the airport company way back in 2015. Kumar moved the consumer forum in June 2015, alleging that he caught a fever after he had to fly from Cochin airport to New Delhi all drenched as there was no rain shelter facility while boarding the flight.
Kumar had sought compensation of Rs 1 lakh from the airport. He had also levelled serious allegations regarding the deficiency of service at the airport and the insufficiency of CISF personnel there.
The compensation order was issued by DCDRC president D B Binu and members V Ramachandran and Sreevidhia T N.
The complainant, who claimed to be a frequent flyer, alleged that he could not catch connecting flights on several occasions due to delays in departure from CIAL owing to a lack of CISF personnel who manage the security checks.
He said he had lost lakhs due to the poor management of the airport but claimed only Rs 1 lakh for the said instance.
The consumer forum, in its verdict dated April 19, 2023, said the complainant failed to provide evidence for his claim of Rs 1 lakh towards the deficiency of services at the airport.
However, the forum found CIAL guilty of not providing a boarding ladder with a rain canopy or cover. The forum stated that the airport authorities failed to prove their claim that it was up to airline companies to provide passengers with such facilities.
"It's generally seen that even huge profit-making entities are indifferent in their attitude towards consumers in the protection of their rights. We cannot be mute spectators when consumers approach commissions like these for the redressal of their grievances which cannot be raised elsewhere," the order said.
Of the Rs 16,000, Rs 8,000 goes as compensation for the physical discomfort and mental agony caused to the complainant and Rs 8,000 to cover the cost of procedures.
The complaint was filed against the managing director, CIAL; chairman (CM), CIAL, chief secretary, Government of Kerala; commandant, CISF, CIAL; director general CISF, Ministry of Home Affairs; and chairman, Airport Authority of India.
CIAL, in its response to the complaint, had claimed that the petition was made with malevolent intentions.
