Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

127/2010

Nandha Kishore - Complainant(s)

Versus

Etihad Airways - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. S.William Ehoma Saviour

14 Jun 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 19.03.2010

                                                                          Date of Order : 14.06.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

 

C.C. No.127 /2010

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 14^th DAY OF JUNE 2018

                                 

Mr. Nanda Kishore,

S/o. Mr. Dinakar,

Old No.3, New No.5,

3^rd Street, Padmanabha Nagar,

Adayar,

Chennai – 600 020.                                                     .. Complainant.                                                       

 

                                                                                             ..Versus..

 

1. ETIHAD AIRWAYS,

Rep. by its Manager,

No.10/11, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.

 

2. Sr. Duty Officer,

ETIHAD AIRWAYS,

No.10/11, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.                                            ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant           :  M/s. S. William & another

Counsel for opposite parties    :  M/s. T. Mathi & others

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for loss of articles, mental agony, physical strain and for deficiency in service  to the complainant.

1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he  travelled to Chennai from Raleigh, U.S.A. on 06.10.2010 via New York and Abu Dhabi on Ethihad Airways.  During the second phase of journey i.e. from JFK New York USA to Abu Dhabi after  furnishing all security checks and just before boarding the flight, one of the Air line staff asked to check the hand baggage of the complainant which was refused by the complainant stating that it contains important documents and his laptop. Thereafter, the complainant obliged to the air line staff for due checked in baggage and tagged the baggage.   After change of flight, the complainant noticed that he has not received his hand baggage which was put in checked in baggage by the 1^st opposite party’s staff.  The complainant later complained about his missing baggage and was traced out on the next day on 09.01.2010 and returned to the complainant.  On receiving the baggage, the complainant checked the baggage in the presence of the opposite parties’ official (delivery man) and found his laptop missing along with a New Tommy Hilfliger Wallet which amounts of 300 US Dollar.  Due complaint was given to the opposite party for which, the opposite parties sent an email.  Thereafter, the complainant sent an email on 10.01.2010 in detail regarding the missing of articles.  On 14.01.2010, the Senior Duty Officer of the 1^st opposite party sent an email stating that no air line would  be liable for any electronics or valuable items was found missing in the checked in baggage.  On 14.01.2010, the complainant sent a detail reply thorough email to the opposite party regarding the compulsion by the  Air line staff of the 1^st opposite party resulting that the missing of valuable laptop and Wallet which was kept in the checked in baggage.  Further the complainant submits that the cost of the laptop is valuing of Rs.60,000/- and New Tommy Hilfliger Wallet worth Rs.2,000/-  with 300 US dollars valuing of Rs.14,000/-.  Therefore the complainant suffered loss, great mental agony and hardship.  Hence the complaint is filed.

2.     The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties is as follows:

The opposite parties specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite parties state that the allegation of compulsion been exercised by the staff of the 1^st opposite party to keep the electronic goods in the checked in baggage is false and imaginary.  The passengers are not entitled to keep the electronic goods and valuable goods in the checked in baggage as per Article 8.3.5.   Further the opposite parties state that the complainant has not given any detail regarding the laptop including make, name of the maker Serial No. etc. and its value.   Further the opposite parties state that as per Article 8.3.4, 8.3.7, the opposite parties are not liable for such articles kept in the checked in baggage.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     In order to prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties filed and document Ex.B1 is filed and marked on the side of the opposite parties.

4.     The point for consideration is:-

Whether the complainant is entitled  to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for loss of articles, mental agony, physical strain and deficiency in service as prayed for with cost?

5.     On point:

The complainant has not filed any written arguments.   Heard the opposite parties’ Counsel.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.  The complainant pleaded and contended that he  travelled to Chennai from Raleigh, U.S.A. on  06.10.2010 via New York and Abu Dhabi on Ethihad Airways, the 1^st opposite party herein.  Ex.A1 is the boarding pass.  During the second phase of journey that is from JFK New York USA to Abu Dhabi after  furnishing all security checks and just before boarding the flight one of the Air line staff asked to check the hand baggage of the complainant which was  refused by the complainant stating that it contains important documents and his laptop.  Thereafter, the complainant obliged to the air line staff for due checked in baggage and tagged the baggage.   After change of flight, the complainant noticed that he has not received his hand baggage which was put in checked in baggage by the 1^st opposite party’s staff.  The complainant later complained about his missing baggage and was traced out on the next day on 09.01.2010 and returned to the complainant.    On receiving the baggage, the complainant checked the baggage in the presence of the opposite parties’ official (delivery man) and found his laptop missing along with a New Tommy Hilfliger Wallet which amounts of 300 US Dollar.  Due complaint was given to the opposite party as per Ex.A3 & Ex.A4 for which, the opposite parties sent an email.  Thereafter, the complainant sent an email on 10.01.2010 in detail regarding the missing of articles.  On 14.01.2010, the Senior Duty Officer of the 1^st opposite party sent an email vide Ex.A5 stating that no air line would  be liable for any electronics or valuable items was found missing in the checked in baggage. On 14.01.2010, the complainant sent a detail reply through email to the opposite party vide Ex.A6 regarding the compulsion by the  Air line staff of the 1^st opposite party to change the hand baggage into checked in baggage resulting that the missing of valuable laptop and Wallet which was kept in the checked in baggage.  

6.     Further the contention of the complainant is that the cost of the laptop is valuing of Rs.60,000/- and New Tommy Hilfliger Wallet worth of Rs.2,000/-  with 300 US dollars valuing of Rs.14,000/-.  But the complainant has not produced any record to prove such value and the articles kept in the checked in baggage except his own versions and letters.  The complainant  also has not given any details regarding the laptop and Wallet (name of manufacturer, Serial No. etc. and the denomination of US dollors including nos.)  The complainant is claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for mental agony and loss of  articles of laptop and Wallet. 

7.     The contention of the opposite parties is that the allegation of compulsion been exercised by the staff of the 1^st opposite party to keep the electronic goods in the checked in baggage is false and imaginary.  The passengers are not entitled to keep the electronic goods and valuable goods in the checked in baggage as per Article 8.3.5.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that the complainant has not given any detail regarding the laptop including make, name of the maker Serial No. etc. and its value.  Equally, the claim of compensation is also imaginary.   Further the contention of the opposite parties is that as per Article 8.3.4, 8.3.7, the opposite parties are not liable for such articles kept in the checked in baggage. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the complainant is not entitled to any compensation and relief and the complaint has to be dismissed.

In the result, this complaint is dismissed.   No costs.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 14^th  day of June 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

 

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	06.01.2010	Copy of boarding pass
Ex.A2	08.01.2010	Copy of property irregularity report
Ex.A3	10.01.2010	Copy of letter sent by the complainant to duty Manager Etihad Airways through E-mail
Ex.A4	12.01.2010	Copy of letter sent by the complainant to duty Manager Etihad Airways through E-mail
Ex.A5	14.01.2010	Copy of letter sent by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant
Ex.A6	14.01.2010	Copy of letter sent by the complainant to the 2nd opposite party
Ex.A7	15.01.2010	Copy of letter sent by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant
Ex.A8	23.01.2010	Copy of letter sent by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant
Ex.A9	30.01.2010	Copy of letter sent by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant
Ex.A10	09.02.2010	Power of Attorney

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES SIDE DOCUMENTS:  

Ex.B1

Copy of General conditions of Carriage (Passenger and Baggage) of the opposite parties

 

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT