Sri.D.Krishnappa,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. The Complainant has come up with this Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with his grievance that he on 12.01.2007 travelled from Bangalore to New Delhi by IC 903 Flight at 1830 hours which is run by the Opposite party. While boarding the flight he had checked in a bag pack containing winter clothing, books, toiletries (including electric shaver), Laptop etc., and on landing at Delhi was shocked to find missing of his bag and he immediately complained and filled up a property irregularity report to the Opposite party at Delhi address and even on contacting the Bangalore Airport several times the bag was not traced. When he lodged a Complaint on 20.01.2007 for tracing the bag or to compensate loss incurred to tune of Rs.1,00,000/-. The Opposite party has offered to pay Rs.4,500/- on the basis of Rs.450/- per kg which is not reasonable and therefore claimed in all Rs.1,64,115/- under different dates.<br /> 2. The Opposite party through its advocate has filed version admitting that the Complainant had travelled in their flight on 12.01.2007 and missing of his baggage. But contended that it was not aware of the contents of the bag, the Opposite party was allowing baggage weighing 10 kgs. in the cabin and there was no necessity for the Complainant to send the bag to the luggage section and if the baggage contained laptop he should have carried with him in the flight, therefore the baggage contained laptop is not accepted by them. It is further denying other averments has contended that the condition of contract relating to Non-International Carriage (Passenger and Baggage) as defined in the carriage by Air Act 1972 governs the settlement of baggage claims and subject to this provisions its liability is limited to a sum of Rs.450/- per kg. for registered baggage and Rs.4,000/- in respect of entire unregistered baggage. Therefore, denying its liability to the claim of the Complainant has prayed for dismissal of the Complaint. <br /> 3. In the course of enquiry of this Complaint, the Complainant and one R.Balachandran for the Opposite party have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing their contentions raised in their respective Complaint and version. The Complainant has produced a copy of representation he had given, Air ticket, Property Irregularity Report and receipts for having purchased laptop and web camera. The counsel for the Complainant and Opposite party have filed the written arguments, but the written arguments of the Opposite party do not bear the signature of other Opposite party or the counsel for it. <br /> 4. On the contentions pointed out above, following points for determination arise.<br /> 1. Whether the Complainant proves that he is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.1,64,115/- as claimed in the Complaint?<br /> 2. Whether the Opposite party proves that its liability is only limited to Rs.450/- per kg. for the registered baggage and Rs.4,500/- for the whole of unregistered baggage?<br /> 3. What order?<br /> 5. Our findings are as under:-<br /> Point no.1 : In the Affirmative in part.<br /> Point no.2 : In the affirmative.<br /> Point no.3 : See the final order.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 6. Points no. 1 to 2:- As we find no dispute between the parties with regard to missing of the baggage of the Complainant, when he travelled in the flight of the Opposite party on 12.01.2007 from Bangalore to New Delhi which was required to be delivered at Delhi. Therefore, we do not go to the issue of missing of baggage, but we have to examine whether the liability of the Opposite party is only restricted to the amount they have stated and whether the Complainant is entitled for the amount he has claimed.<br /> 7. The Complainant in the Complaint, has narrated as if his bag contained a Laptop worth Rs.51,300/- Creative Web Camera Rs.1,495/-, Winter Clothing, books, toiletries worth Rs.20,000/-, cost of Air ticket (To & Fro Delhi) Rs.9,320/- claiming as if he had kept all these articles in the bag. The Opposite party has denied its knowledge about the contents of the bag. Of course, the Complainant had not declared anywhere the contents of the bag, therefore the assessment has to be made on probabilities. The Complainant prior to filing of this Complaint admitted to had addressed a letter to the Opposite party on 20.01.2007 in which he has specifically informed the Opposite party that his missing bag contained winter clothing, books, toiletries (including electric shaver) and laptop. This letter do not speak of the bag containing creative web camera and Air ticket and when the Complainant gave the property irregularity report to the Opposite party also did not mention the number of articles contained in the bag their value. Therefore, it comes out if the Complainant had kept any more articles in the missing bag he would have definitely mentioned all those items in the Complaint given by him to the Opposite party on 21.01.2007, but at the later stage when he filed this Complaint. The Complainant in the Complaint also has not specifically mentioned the web camera and air ticket, but has assessed the loss as to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/-, but in the prayer column he has come up with an addition of web camera and air ticket and escalated his claim. Therefore, the claim of the Complainant towards web camera and air ticket found to have no basis and appears to be an exaggerated and false claim.<br /> 8. The Complainant has produced a receipt for having purchased a laptop on 24.11.2005 for Rs.51,300/-, this has not been questioned by the Opposite party. Therefore, the claim of the Complainant for compensating towards loss of laptop, then loss of winter clothing, books and toiletries has to be considered.<br /> 9. The counsel representing the Complainant in his written arguments has contended that the Opposite party irrespective of the contents of the bag and their value cannot value the baggage at Rs.450/- per kg. and therefore submitted that the Opposite party is liable to compensate the exact loss that the Complainant has sustained. The counsel for the Opposite party invited our attention to the conditions of contract relating to Non-International Carriage Passenger and baggage and stated that as per those conditions, the Opposite party is only liable to pay as damages at 450/- per kg. towards the missing baggage or lost baggage. The counsel for Opposite party has also relied upon a decision in his support reported in II(2001) CPJ 32 - NC. The Complainant when he got the baggage checked in or registered had not declared the value of the contents. If he had done so the Opposite party could not have escaped from its liability. Thus in the absence of such a discloser the Opposite party is liable to compensate, the consigner under rule 22 of Carriage by Air Act as held by the Hon’ble National Commission.<br /> 10. As we have pointed out above, the Complainant has claimed Rs.51,300/- towards loss of laptop. Admittedly, it was purchased more than a year back and it was put to use by the Opposite party. Even otherwise as there is no proof placed to show that bag of the Complainant contained any goods worth so much the Complaint is not entitled for claiming the actual loss he suffered if any. Permissible limit luggage the passenger could have carried is held as 10 k.gs. Therefore, the Complainant is entitled to the total compensation of Rs.4,000/-. The Complainant has claimed loss of Rs.50,000/- towards set back of his business and consequence loss. He has not given any details of set back in his business and consequence loss he suffered, the Complainant has also not explained as how for want of laptop or any other articles he suffered a set back. Therefore, we do not propose to award any compensation towards that head. The Complainant has claimed a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards his suffering and tension. No doubt, the Complainant when heard of missing of his belongings would have naturally under gone some tension and sufferings and we find it just and reasonable to award a sum of Rs.3,500/- towards that head and Rs.1,000/- towards his miscellaneous expenditure and to Rs.500/- towards cost of this proceeding. With these, we answer point nos.1 & 2 accordingly and pass the following order:- <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is allowed in part.<br /> 2. The Opposite party is directed to pay damages of Rs.8,500/- to the complainant within two months from the date of this order, failing which it shall pay interest at 12% p.a. from the date of this Complaint till the date of payment.<br /> 3. The Opposite party is directed to pay cost of Rs.500/- being the cost of this Complaint.<br /> 4. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br />