THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KOZHIKODE.
C.C.297/2011
Dated this the 20th day of February 2015
( Present: Smt. Rose Jose, B.Sc, LLB. : President)
Smt.Beena Joseph, M.A : Member
ORDER
By Beena Joseph, Member
The petition was filed on 03/08/2011. The crux of the complaint is that the complainant had entrusted a document packet to be delivered at Delhi through opposite party’s air cargo, but due to the negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party, the packet was not delivered by them. Hence complainant sustained damage and mental agony and seeks compensation for the same.
Notice was issued to both parties which served on them, then Opposite Party remained absent and set ex-party on 01/09/2011. Later Opposite party filed IA 202/2011 to set aside the ex-party order passed by this Forum, it was allowed later, Opposite party filed version stating that the above complaint is not maintainable and denied the entire allegations. It is stated that the Passport of the complainant was booked under AWV number 5997281 on the Opposite parties flight IC 7611 on 30/08/2010 weighing 150 gm.s to be delivered to M/s. Flight Centre Management Travel Solution Delhi. On that day due to the heavy rain and strong wind, most of the flights were delayed, the above mentioned air craft which was carrying complainant’s consignment was also held up at Karipur due to bad weather. After reception of complaint the opposite party immediately acted and took necessary steps to find out the consignment but it could not be traced. Further on 30th August there was heavy rain and strong wind in and around Karipur, the opposite parties flight became delayed. The consignment of the complainant containing passport got blown off from the trolley along with other related documents while moving from baggage make up area to the aircraft which incidentally was parked in remote bay area and it would have been picked up by the airport cleaners with other waste disposed of the waste in the dumping yard. The above incident being out of the opposite party’s control. And opposite party took all immediate steps possible to minimize damage. Further they submit that there was no carelessness on their part and they tried to indemnify the complainant. But complainant is not entitled to get Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation which is highly exorbitant. There is no cause of action and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The above complaint was filed on experimental basis in order to harass the opposite party. Hence they claiming for a dismissal of complaint with cost.
On the basis of the version following issues were framed.
Whether the complaint is maintainable or not?
Is there any delay of service on the part of the Opposite party?
If so, whether the complainant sustained any damages or mental agony?
What are the awards to be granted?
All these points can be considered together to the brevity of the case. The complainant herein is an Engineer employed in Samsung Company in Dubai, he was invited to attend an Engineering Workshop at Seoul, Korea on 6th September to 18th September, 2010. The complainant was asked to report by 4th or 5th September and he was directed to submit his passport for stamping Visa since it was urgent. Complainant directly gone to airport and entrusted his passport to the cargo section of opposite party on 30/08/2010 by paying Rs.775/-. But the passport was not served on the party concerned. Thus complainant made efforts to find out the passport and preferred complaint with the authority. Later on 2nd September complainant got a call from one Mr. Mammed saying that he had got a packet containing complainant’s name and telephone number from a waste bin at Chelari many kilo meter away from Karipur. Complainant rushed to the spot and found out that it was his passport entrusted to the opposite party. And he preferred complaints to the authorities and preferred compensation which was denied by the opposite party.
Due to the loss of the passport complainant could not obtained visa in time and attend the meeting which affected the future of his career. Thus he sustained heavy mental agony also resulted in damages to the complainant. due to the service deficiency and negligence on the part of the opposite party.
There was no oral evidence on either of the parties. But complainant has produced documents A1 to A10 to prove his case. A1 is the bill for Rs.775/- issued by opposite party, A2 is the letter issued by the Samsung Company to the complainant. A3 is the invitation to the complainant to attend the meeting at Seoul. A4 is the paper news. A5 is the cover of the packet contains the seal and sticker of Indian Airlines. A6 is the e-ticket to the complainant to Dubai and Seoul. A7 is the notice given by the complainant to the M.P. A8 is the notice given to the Minister for Civil Aviation. A9 is the reply given by Air India. A10 is the lawyer notice issued by Adv. Gopalakrishnan with acknowledgement.
Going through the above Exhibits A1 to A10, it is very clear that the deficiency and negligence on the part of the opposite parties are apparent. Only because of their gross negligence, petitioner lost his chance to attend the workshop which scheduled at Seoul. The handling of a document like passport without care and caution on the part of the opposite party is established by the complainant, in such a situation, definitely the person concerned will put irresponsible injury, mental agony, hardship. In this matter petitioner was not adduced any oral evidence regarding his promotion and the loss with respect to the damages sustained to him. Hence we are not in a position to award compensation to that head.
On the other hand petitioner established the service deficiency, lethargy, negligence on the part of the opposite party. Thus complainant had sustained severe metal agony and tension which has to be compensated adequately.
In the result, the above petition is allowed in part. The Opposite party should have taken proper care, diligence in handling precious documents of the customer. On the contrary complainant has to be compensated adequately. Hence we are of the opinion that the opposite party is liable to pay Rs.60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand only) as compensation towards deficiency of service and gross negligence on the part of the opposite party. Opposite party is directed to pay the amount within one month from the date of Order, otherwise it will carry 10% interest from the date of this Order.
Pronounced in the open court this the 20th day of February, 2015
Date of filing: 03/08/2011.
SD/- PRESIDENT SD/- MEMBER
APPENDIX
Documents exhibited for the complainant:
A1. Air Waybill issued by the opposite party
A2. Letter received from Samsung Company
A3. Invitation received from Samsung Company
A4. Paper publication dated 03/09/2010
A5. Cover of the packet
A6. E-ticket
A7. Complaint given to the Union Minister by the complainant
A8. Complaint given to the Union Minister by the complainant
A9. Letter received from the opposite party
A10. Lawyer notice sent to the opposite part
Documents exhibited for the opposite party:
Nil
Witness examined for the complainant:
None
Witness examined for the opposite party:
None
Sd/-President
//True copy//
(Forwarded/By Order)
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
