Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/104/2012

Sharma Suchitra - Complainant(s)

Versus

AIR INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

K.M. Gupta

20 May 2015

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:03-04.2012

                                                                                                Date of Order:20-05-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                             VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:

1.  Sri H. Ananda Rao, M.A., L.L.B.,

     President           

2. Smt K. Saroja, M.A. B.L.,

     Lady Member 

                                3. Sri C.V. Rao,  M.A., B.L.,

                                     Male Member

 

                             Wednesday, the 20^th day of May, 2015.

                                 CONSUMER CASE No.104/2012

Between:-

Smt. Sharma Suchitra, W/o Tirumal Kumar,

Hindu, aged about 27 years, represented by her

G.P.A. Holder and Authorized Agent Sri Tulasi Ram

Dayama, S/o R.L. Dayama, Hindu, aged about 55

Years, resident of Thotapalem, Vizianagaram.

….. Complainant

And:-

AIR INDIA, represented by its Manager,

Airport, Near Sheelanagar Area,

Visakhapatnam .

                                                                                           …  Opposite Party

                           

          This case coming on 15.05.2015 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri  K.M. Gupta & Sri K. Vamsi Krishna, Advocates for the Complainant and Sri M. N. Aditya, Advocate for the Opposite Party and and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

                                                ORDER

          (As per Sri. H. Ananda Rao, Honourable President, on behalf of the Bench)

 

1.       This consumer complaint is filed by the Complainant against the Opposite Party directing him to handover the lost blue baggage of the Complainant together with all the lost articles i.e., 4 Gold Bangles of 60 Grams, 1 Gold Chain of 35 Grams, 2 Rings of 20 Grams, 1 Digital Camera of Rs.10,000/- 1 Handy Cam of Rs.20,000/-, 12 Blouses, Child Medicine, 4 Spray  Bottles, Baby soft Toys to the Complainant; or alternatively the Opposite Party to pay a sum of Rs.2,18,000/- towards the worth of the articles in the lost baggage together with subsequently interest @ 18% p.a., and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation with costs.

 2.      The case of the Complainant in brief is that the Complainant purchased a ticket in Flight bearing No. AI 617 bearing No.0982100612646 for the travel on 8^th day of April 2011 in the Opposite Party flight.   The Complainant with intent to go to Vizianagaram to her in-laws house boarded the aforesaid flight of the Complainant handed over three bags 45 Kgs. of the luggage and on reaching Visakhapatnam the concern Opposite Party authorities concern handed over only two bags out of the three bags by mis-placed the BLUE AIR BAG weighing 15 Kgs. of weight containing the following articles: a) 4 Gold Bangles of 60 Grams, b) 1 Gold Chain of 35 Grams, c) 2 Rings of 20 Grams, d) 1 Digital Camara worth of Rs.10,000/-. e) 1 Handy Cam worth of Rs.20,000/-, f) 12 Blouses, g) Child Medicines, h) 4 Spray Bottles and i) Baby Soft Toys. 

 

3.       That immediately, she informed and complained the same to the concern authorities who received the said complaint and assured they will verify and handover the same baggage lost by the Complainant but they failed to hand over the same.    Inspite of repeated demands and requests made by her, they failed to handover the lost baggage to her and on that she got issued a legal notice call upon the Opposite Party to hand over the lost baggage containing the articles worth of Rs.2,18,000/- to the Opposite Party who received the same and failed to handover the lost baggage.  The Opposite Party concern in the reply also expressed their regret for the inconvenience and agreed to discharge a sum of 6,750/- only as full and final settlement of the claim i.e., Rs.450/- per kg.   Hence, this Complaint.

 

4.       The Case of the Opposite Party denying the material averments of the Complainant by admitting the Complainant travelled in the aforesaid flight and handed over three bags 45 Kgs. of the luggage and failed to handover one baggage.  They under took the Complainant that they will verify and handover the same baggage lost by the Complainant within a short span of time.   It is also the case of the Opposite party that the Complainant did not declare that baggage containing valuable as alleged supra.   At the time of handing over of the luggage would not entitle her for any damages whatsoever, and that the same does not amount to deficiency of service.

 

5.       That the Complainant got issued another rejoinder/notice to the Opposite Party stating that the loss sustained to her for the deficiency of service on their part of the Opposite Party and in fact the blue baggage that was lost due to the alleged deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite party itself is worth more than Rs.7,000/- and that the Opposite Party issued a reply notice dated 4^th day of July, 2011 that the Opposite Party will pay only Rs.6,750/- to the Complainant and not any excess.   That the Montreal convention stipulated guidelines to settle mishandled baggage claim, India has become 91^st Member of the said convention effective 1^st July, 2009.    As per the above guidelines to offer to pay Rs.6,750/- to the Complainant but she refused to receive the same.   For these reasons, the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 

6.       To prove the case on behalf of the Complainant, she filed her  evidence affidavit and got marked Exs.A1 to A8.   On the other hand, Station Manager, Air India filed affidavit on behalf of the Opposite Party and got marked Exs.B1 and B2. 

 

7.       Ex.A1 is the E-Tickets Confirmation & Itinerary issued by the Opposite Party dated 07.04.2011.    Ex.A2 is the Itinerary Receipt issued by the Opposite Party in favour of the Complainant on 08.04.2011   .   Ex.A3 is the Letter addressed by the Complainant to the Manager of the Opposite Party dated 19.04.2011.   Ex.A4 is the photo copy of letter addressed by the Complainant to the Manager of the Opposite Party dated 14.06.2011.  Ex.A5 is the Reply letter with Discharge Voucher issued by the Opposite Party to the Complainant dated 23.06.2011   Ex.A6 is the office copy of letter addressed by the Complainant to the Manager of the Opposite Party dated 29.06.2011.   Ex.A7 is the reply letter addressed by Chief Manager (Air India) of the Opposite Party to the Complainant dated 04.07.2011.    Ex.A8 is the General Power of Attorney dated 19.06.2011.

 

          Ex.B1 is the photo copy of General Conditions of Carriage for Passengers and Baggage issued by the Opposite Party.  Ex.B2 is the photo copy of Notification issued by the Ministry of Civil Aviation dated 17.01.2014.

 

8.       Both parties filed their respective written arguments.

 

9.       Heard oral arguments from both sides.

 

10.     Now the points that arise for determination is:-

Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party and the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs of advance amount with interest, compensation and costs.

 

11.       Admittedly there is no evidence whatsoever, let in by the complainant to show that she declared the value of the luggage in the flight and it containing valuables as alleged by her in her complaint.   The Opposite Party in their reply letter dated 4.7.2011 agreed to pay only Rs.6,750/- to the Complainant due to alleged deficiency in service on their part.    The Opposite Party submitted the Montreal convention stipulated guidelines to settled mishandled baggage claims, wherein India has become 91^st Member of the said convention effective 1^st July, 2009 which indicates claims for loss of baggage or loss of  contents will be settled @ SDR 17 (SDR Special Drawing Rights) as per kilo for actual or estimated weight loss.   It is also noted as per Montreal conviction maximum legal liability for loss/damage and delay of baggage is SDR 1131 per ticket passengers unless passengers has declared a higher value at the time of check in and paid appropriate valuation charges.   As per the above referred guidelines, the Opposite Party offered to pay Rs.6,750/- to the Complainant but she refused to receive the same.    On the other hand, the Complainant to controvert those guidelines she did not come forward with any record evidencing that she is entitled for more amount.      

 

12.     Perused the rules for loss of baggage filed by the counsel for the Opposite Party along with memo dated 24.04.2015 and they are marked as Exs.B1 and Ex.B2.   The counsel for the Opposite Party by drawing our attention to Section-14 Complaint against the Airlines for the loss of ten kilogrammes of luggage while travelling liability of Airways is governed by  Rule-23 of Second Schedule of Carriage by Air Act, 1972 under which the liability airways is limited. 

 

13.     As seen from the Complainant it is evident that the Complainant did not at all reveal that she made any special declaration, at the time of registration of luggage are paid any supplementary that the air baggage contains old bangles, digital camera etc.   In such, state of affairs, Rule-22 of Chapter III of the First Schedule or the Second Schedule applies.  Then the Complainant cannot get any amount by way of damages other than an amount quantified in a sum of Rs.250/- francs for the missing suitcase.   It is held in (2001) 1 CPC 203/2001 1 CLT 398/ (2000) 3 CPJ 335 even assuming that there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party airways the compensation that the Complainant would be entitled to get from the Opposite Party in the loss of the missing suitcase cannot exceed as per the rules laid down.  

 

14.     In the light of our discussion referred supra, we are of the considered view that the Complainant is entitled only for an amount of Rs.6,750/- (Rupees Six thousand, seven hundred and fifty only) only as full and finally settlement of the claim.   Accordingly the same is awarded.

 

15.     Record shows the Opposite Party expressed by way of reply notice that they are ready to pay an amount of Rs.6,750/- in the year, 2011 itself by expressing regret for the inconvenience but the Complainant failed to receive the same.   Therefore, the Complainant is not entitled for any interest.                                           

 

16.     Whether the Complainant is entitled for compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- is to be considered.   It appears as seen from the evidence of PW-1 that the Complainant was compelled to approach the Opposite Party and therefore experienced a lot of physical strain besides mental agony and financial loss. It is un-dispute fact that the Opposite Party did not refund the amount subscribed by the Complainant.   Naturally that made have put the Complainant to suffer some mental agony besides physical stress and strain.   In this view of the matter, we sincerely feel that it is a fit case to award compensation.   But that does not and cannot mean to say that the Complainant claim for compensation is acceptable.    Having regard to all these facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion award of compensation of Rs1,000/- would serve the ends of justice.   We therefore, proposed to award compensation of Rs.1,000/-,  in the circumstances of the case on hand. Accordingly this point is answered. 

 

17.     Before parting our discussion, it is incumbent and imperative on our part to consider the costs of litigation.    The Complainant ought not have to approach this Forum had his claim for refund of the sum of Rs.2,18,000/- or reliefs sought for have been honored by the Opposite Parties within a reasonable time and in view of the matter, the Complainant’s claim for claims for cost deserves to be allowed.   In our considered and unanimous opinion awarding a sum of Rs. 2,500/- as costs would appropriate and reasonable.   Accordingly costs are awarded.

 

 

18.     In the result, this Complaint is allowed in part directing the Opposite Party to pay an amount of Rs. 6,750/- (Rupees Six thousand, Seven hundred and fifty only), a compensation of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) and costs of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand and five hundred only) to the Complainant.   Time for compliance, one month.

     Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this the 20^th day of May, 2015.  

Sd/-                                           Sd/-                                           Sd/-

Male Member                   Lady Member                                          President

 

                             APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	07.04.2011	E-Tickets Confirmation & Itinerary issued by the OP	Original
Ex.A02	08.04.2011	Itinerary Receipt issued by the OP in favour of the Comp;lainant	Original
Ex.A03	19.04.2011	Letter addressed by the Complainant to the Manager of the OP	Original
Ex.A04	14.06.2011	Letter addressed by the Complainant to the Manager of the OP	Photo copy
Ex.A05	23.06.2011	Reply letter with Discharge Voucher issued by the OP to the Complainant	Original
Ex.A06	29.06.2011	Letter addressed by the Complainant to the Manager of the OP	Office copy
Ex.A07	04.07.2011	Reply letter addressed by Chief Manager (Air India) of the OP to the Complainant	Photo copy
Ex.A08	19.06.2011	General Power of Attorney	Original

For the Opposite Party:-                                             

No.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.B1		General Condition of Carriage of Passengers and Baggage issued by the OP	Photo coy
Ex.B2	17.01.2014	Notification issued by the Manager of Civil Aviation dated	Photo copy

 

Sd/-                                           Sd/-                                                Sd/-

Male Member                     Lady Member                                    President