<br /> COMPLAINT FILED: 31.07.2008<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 06th OCTOBER 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.1691/2008<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Sri.Anirudh Rawal,Aged 24 years,# 183, 2nd Cross, 4th Main,Viveknagar,Bangalore.Advocate – Sri.Venkataramana K.S.V/s.<br /> OPPOSITE PARTIES 1. Interglobe Aviation Limited (“Indigo Airlines)Tower C, 3rd Cross,Global Business Park,Mehrauli Gurogoan Road,Gurgoan – 122002.2. Managing Director,Interglobe Aviation Limited (“Indigo”)Tower C, 3rd Floor,Global Business Park,Mehrauli Gurgaon Road,Guragoan – 122022Haryana.3. Officer Incharge (Bangalore) Interglobe Aviation Ltd.,(Indigo Airlines)Bengalooru International Airport,Devanahalli,Bangalore.Advocate – Jayna Kothari<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to pay a compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- and for such other relief’s on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> <br /> Complainant booked a Flight ticket with OP so as to travel from Bangalore to Delhi on 07.06.2008 in Flight No.6 E 132. OP collected Rs.4,224/-. Complainant came to Bangalore Airport and got checked his baggage. When he reached the Delhi Airport he was shocked to note that his baggage was missing. The said baggage was containing cannon camera, wireless head phone, clothes and other articles of worth of Rs.50,000/-. Immediately he lodged the Property Irregularity Report at OP outlet in Delhi Airport. There was no proper response. The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant to OP several times went in futile. He even got issued the legal notice on 14.06.2008. Again there was no response. OP went on making false assurances and promises that they are in search of missing baggage. For no fault of his, complainant is made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. The hostile attitude of the OP led him to feel deficiency in service on the part of OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the reliefs accordingly.<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. On appearance, OP filed the version denying all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. According to OP this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain this complaint. It is further contended that the baggage which is checked by the complainant on that day was weighing only 15 kgs. On the receipt of the complaint from the complainant OP made its best efforts to trace out the missing baggage, but could not. That is why with all fairness they came forward to settle the dispute for Rs.3,000/- as per the IndiGo conditions of carriage. Complainant has not accepted the same. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. The claim now made by the complainant is highly exorbitant. There is no proof that complainant has kept such valuable articles in the said missing baggage on that day. Under the circumstances OP is not obliged to pay the cost of the said missing baggage to the tune of Rs.50,000/- as claimed. The other allegations of the complainant are devoid of merits. Among these grounds, OP prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP has also filed the affidavit evidence and produced the documents. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 4. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under:<br /> <br /> Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant has Proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of <br /> the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is <br /> entitled for the relief’s now claimed?<br /> <br /> Point No. 3 :- To what Order?<br /> <br /> <br /> 5. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, both oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on:<br /> <br /> Point No.1:- In Affirmative<br /> Point No.2:- Affirmative in part<br /> Point No.3:- As per final Order.<br /> <br /> <br /> R E A S O N S<br /> <br /> 6. At the outset it is not at dispute that the complainant booked a Flight ticket with OP Airlines so as to travel from Bangalore to Delhi on 07.06.2008 through Flight No.6 E 132. It is also not at dispute that the complainant got checked his baggage at Bangalore Airport. Now it is the grievance of the complainant that when he reached Delhi Airport he was shocked to note that his baggage was missing. Then immediately made complaint to the OP outlet at the said Airport. Though OP promised to trace out his baggage, ultimately it failed. The repeated requests and demands made by the complainant went in futile. Thus he felt deficiency in service.<br /> <br /> 7. It is further contended by the complainant that he has kept the valuable articles like camera, wireless head phone, clothes in all worth of Rs.50,000/- in the said baggage. Of course complainant has produced some receipts to substantiate his claim but still the point remains to our consideration is whether those things are actually put in the baggage which he carried on that day. So without further discussions we can restrain in saying that complainant carried certain articles through the said missing baggage.<br /> <br /> 8. On going through the defence set out by the OP, OP has not disputed the fact that the baggage which is checked by the complainant is missing and they are unable to trace the same. So that itself amounts to deficiency in service. Of course OP has taken up a contention that this Forum has no jurisdiction. We don’t find force in the said defence. It is also not at dispute that the baggage checked by the complainant was going 15 kgs. Now according to the OP as per the IndiGo conditions they are liable to pay a compensation of only Rs.3,000/- and they offered the same. But complainant refused to accept the same. So one thing is made clear that OP admits its liability and default. Under such circumstances we need not to go much in detail about other aspect.<br /> <br /> 9. Now it is settled law that when there is a loss of baggage the complainant is entitled to claim compensation under Carriage by Air act 1972 to an extent of 20 kg at the rate of 20 US dollars per k.g which will come to 400 US dollars. We have followed the said basic principles and guidelines. With regard to mental agony suffered by the complainant due to the loss of the said baggage and its contents in our view justice will be met by awarding compensation of Rs.10,000/- with some litigation cost. With these reasons we answer point Nos.1 & 2 accordingly and proceed to pass the following: <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is allowed in part. OP is directed to pay 400 US dollars (Rs.19,040/-) towards the loss of luggage. Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony as compensation and litigation cost Rs.1,000/- to the complainant. This order is to be complied within four weeks from the date of its communication.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 06th day of October 2008.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Vln* <br /> <br /> <br />