SHRI SWAPAN KUMAR MAHANTY, PRESIDENT                 

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

            The case of the complainant, in brief, is that on 09.09.2018 she travelled from Patna to Kolkata by Indigo Airlines Flight No. 6E708. On arrival at Kolkata Airport she astonished to found that her suitcase bearing carrier bag tag No.6E708 damaged and seal had been broken. Four gold bangles worth Rs.2,83,821/- were found missing and the cost of the suitcase is Rs.11,000/-. Complainant immediately informed the fact to the OP, the representatives of the OP issued memo for damaged articles and also assured to compensate the loss of articles. In spite of repeated request the OP did not pay any heed to pay compensation. The OP deliberately adopted unfair trade practice and trying to deprive the complainant from her lawful right and claim. Hence,  the complaint.

            In spite of service of notice OP did not turn up to contest the case. As such, the case has proceeded ex parte against the OP.

Point for Determination

1)         Is the OP deficient in rendering service to the complainant?

2)         Is the OP indulged in unfair trade practice?

3)         Is the complainant entitled to get any relief or reliefs as prayed for?

Decision with Reasons

Points No. 1 to 3 :

            All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity in discussion.

            To prove her case complaint adduced evidence through affidavit and has also produced photocopies of E-Ticket of Flight No. 6E708 (Patna to Kolkata) of Indigo Airlines, Carrier bag tag No. 6E708, cash memo of Bangles and missing information. On perusal of the E-Ticket and boarding pass we find that on 09.09.2018 complainant travelled from Patna to Kolkata by OP Airlines, her suitcase had been broken and four gold bangles were missing. Complainant lodged property irregularity report to the OP at Airport. Complainant has claimed Rs.2,83,821/- for loss of four Bangles and she has also produced the receipt of the bangles but the photocopy of the complaint dated 10.09.2018 addressed to the Officer-in-charge, Airport Police Station demolished the case of the complainant regarding missing of four gold bangles. The complaint goes to show that two bangles were missing from her suitcase. On perusal of the Property Irregularity Report dated 09.09.2018 we find that the content of baggage was cloth. There is no whisper regarding bangles in the property irregularity report. It is the obligation of the complainant either to disclose the contents of the suitcase while check-in and she has to take precautions to insure the contents. Therefore, the complainant cannot fasten her liability for missing of bangles. It is also true that the Indigo Airlines also to explain as to how the suitcase was damaged and seal had been broken which has resulted in pilferage or theft. The management of the Airlines is also responsible. Though the complainant has claimed Rs.2,94,821/- for loss of four gold bangles and cost of suitcase and she has also produced money receipt of four bangle, but there is some contributory negligence on her part. As such, she should have to award a token compensation. Thus, all the points under determination are disposed of.

In the result, the case succeeds in part.

Hence,

Ordered

That the complaint case be and the same is allowed ex parte in part against the OP with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-.

The OP is directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order, failing which to pay interest  at the rate of 8 percent p.a.(at the rate of eight per cent per annum) from the date of the expiry of the said 45(forty-five) days till payment.

Liberty be given to the complainant to put the order in execution, if the OP transgresses to comply the order.