THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR
Complaint No. 227-14
Date of Institution : 22.4.2014
Date of Decision : 23.01.2015
Balkar Singh Sandhu son of Kabal Singh Sandhu, resident of village and post office Valtoha, Tehsil Patti Distt.Tarn Taran now resident of C/o Lt.Col.Milkha Singh, House No. 38-A, Ranjit Avenue,Amritsar
...Complainant
Vs.
General Manager, Airways, India Limited, S.M.Centre Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri Mumbai-400059
Station Manager, Jet Airways Terminal No. 3, International Indira Gandhi Airport, New Delhi.
Sh. Munish Maro, Station Manager, Jet Airways, Sri Guru Ram Dass International Airport, Raja Sansi, Amritsar
....Opp.parties
Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present : For the complainant : Sh. J.S.Pannu,Adv
For the opposite parties : Sh. Ajay Mehta,Adv
Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President,
Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa,Member
Order dictated by :-
Bhupinder Singh, President
1 Present complaint has been filed by Balkar Singh Sandhu under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he has travelled from Calgory to New Delhi in British Airways flight on 5.5.2012 alongwith his wife Narinder
-2-
Kaur Sandhu and grand daughter Ramneek Kaur Sandhu. The complainant boarded from London on 6.5.2012 at 17.40 hrs and arrived at New Delhi terminal at 6.20 a.m on 7.5.2012 . Thereafter complainant travelled from New Delhi terminal to Amritsar in flight No. 9W2235 A&Q of Jet Airways on 7.5.2012 and arrived at Sri Guru Ram Dass International Airport Amritsar at 12.30 p.m on 7.5.2012. The complainant was asked to pay for the extra baggage charges to the tune of Rs. 6000/- bearing ticket No. 5892600/96796 and the complainant handed over the six baggages to the opposite parties at New Delhi and boarding passes were issued to the complainant. When the complainant reached at Airport Amritsar , he found that one suit case was missing. Complainant lodged report with opposite party No.3 for the loss of the said suit case and loss of baggage missing report was also issued to the complainant at Sri Guru Ram Dass International Airport Amritsar. Thereafter complainant made number of requests to the opposite parties to trace out the baggage but to no avail. Complainant also served legal notice dated 24.8.2013 upon the opposite parties and in reply opposite parties offered Rs. 4950/- to the complainant. Complainant has alleged that the bag so lost was of American Tourist costing Rs. 9000/- and it was containing four winter suits of value Rs. 60000/-, six pieces of pants and four shirts of value Rs. 40000/- . It was also containing five lady suits worth Rs. 1 lac. Complainant has also suffered physical tension due to loss of baggage and also suffered loss financially by serving legal notice upon the opposite parties to the tune of Rs. 5000/- and on purchase of articles costing Rs. 50000/- and in all spent Rs. 2,34,000/-, however he claimed Rs. 2 lacs only. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs. 2 lacs.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written version in which it was admitted that one piece of baggage that belonged to the complainant went missing
-3-
and the complainant was given offer as per weight to the tune of Rs. 4950/- as compensation. It was submitted that opposite party had already offered compensation for missing of baggage as per weight , clothes which were kept in Samsonite bag, but complainant in his complaint has stated that the bag so missing was of American Tourist company. It was further submitted that son of the complainant also lodged complaint on telephone and it was conveyed to the complainant's son that the missing bag of the complainant was searched in all areas in New Delhi as well as in Amritsar and that the bag was not found, as such the opposite party had no option but to compensate the complainant in terms of its weight loss policy for Rs. 4950/- i.e at the rate of Rs. 450/- per kg of 11 kg of weight loss, whereas the complainant claimed for 23 kg weight loss. However, the complainant rejected this offer and has filed the present complaint. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit exbt.C1/A alongwith documents exbt.C-1 to C-20..
4. Opposite parties tendered affidavit or Sh. Manish Maro, Manager exbt.OP1,2,3/1 copies of e-mails exbt.OP1,2,3/2 to OP1,2,3/7, copy of property/irregularity report exbt.OP1,2,3/8, copy of ticket exbt.OP1,2,3/9.
5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties arguments advanced by the ld.counsels for both the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsels for both the parties.
6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant alongwith his wife Narinder Kaur Sandhu and grand daughter Ramneek Kaur Sandhu travelled from Calgory to New Delhi in British Airways which landed at New Delhi Terminal on 7.5.2012 at 6.20 a.m alongwith six bags. Thereafter complainant alongwith his wife Narinder
-4-
Kaur Sandhu and Grand daughter Ramneek Kaur Sandhu travelled from New Delhi
Terminal No. 3 to Amritsar in flight No. 9W2235 A&Q of Jet Airways on 7.5.2012 vide ticket exbt.C-1. The said flight arrived at Sri Guru Ram Dass International Airport, Amritsar at 12.30 p.m on 7.5.2012. The complainant at Terminal No. 3 was askd to pay for the extra baggages charges of Rs. 6000/- bearing ticket No. 5892600196796 exbt.C-2 dated 7.5.2012. So all the six baggages were overloaded i.e. having more than 23 kg weight (as against 23 kg weight permissible). Six baggages were handed over to the opposite party at New Delhi Airport by the complainant and boarding passes were issued to the complainant which are exbt.C-7 to C-11. When the complainant and his two co-travellers reached at Amritsar Airport, they found that one suitcase i.e. attache (baggage) was missing and the report to this effect was lodged by the complainant with opposite party No.3. The loss of bag caused immense mental torture to the complainant. The said bag was containing weight more than 23 kg and was containing valueable winter suits, pants and shirts of the complainant and was also containing five lady suits. Loss of baggage missing report was also issued to the complainant by the officer at Sri Guru Ram Das International Airport Amritsar which is exbt.C-12. Opposite party could not trace out the the baggage and handover the same to the complainant till date. The complainant served legal notice
dated 24.8.2013 exbt.C-16 upon the opposite party through registered post , postal receipts of which are exbt.C-17 to C-20 and the reply of the same was given by the opposite party which is exbt.C-14 vide which the opposite parties offered compensation of Rs. 4950/- only to the complainant. Subsequent notice dated 20.9.2013 was also sent by the complainant to the opposite parties but inspite of that the opposite parties did not pay the compensation to the complainant. The complainant submitted that the said suitcase was costing Rs. 9000/- which was containing four winter suits of the value of Rs. 60000/-, six pieces of pants and
-5-
four shirts of the value of Rs. 40000/- . It was also containing five lady suits worth Rs. 1 lac. The complainant also suffered mental as well as physical tension. The complainant also paid amount of Rs. 5000/- to Advocate for service of legal notice and the complainant has to purchase the articles/clothes for himself and his wife costing Rs. 50000/- in all complainant suffered loss of Rs. 2,34,000/- . However, complainant stated that he claimed Rs. 2 lacs only. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that by not paying the compensation amount to the complainant, opposite parties are in deficiency of service qua the complainant.
7. Whereas the case of the opposite parties is that complainant had duly submitted six bags at New Delhi Airport to the opposite parties for travelling on flight No. 9W 2235 from New Delhi to Amritsar. The opposite parties also admitted that one piece of baggage that belonged to complainant went missing as the same could not be traced out and could not be handed over to the complainant at Amritsar. The complainant was given offer as per weight of Rs. 4950/- as compensation . The bag was Samsonite bag whereas the complainant has alleged that the bag was of the company of American Tourist and further stated that only clothes have been kept but not a single line uttered regarding the missing of articles in the bag. The complainant has, therefore, manipulated the story only to get utmost benefits. The baggage services Team at New Delhi of the opposite parties on 21.5.2013 got a telehone call from the son of the complainant with regard to the missing bag. As per World Tracer Baggage System, it is clear that the baggage of the complainant was not traceable as such the opposite parties had no option but to compensate the complainant in terms of weight loss policy . The bag was containing 11 kg weight, as such the complainant was entitled to compensation @ Rs. 450/- per kg ; in all Rs. 4950/- and e-mail to this effect was also sent to the complainant which is exbt.OP1,2,3/3, but the complainant refused to accept this compensation for the reasons best known to him. The opposite parties refused to pay any exaggerated
-6-
compensation charges claimed by the complainant amounting to Rs. 2,34,000/-. Opposite parties further alleged that the son of the complainant namely Sarabjit Sandhu vide e-mail exbt.OP1,2,3/3 dated 29.5.2012 told the opposite parties that the bag i.e. suitcase lost was of the value of Rs. 4000/- and it was containing new shoes, clothes and toys and it's all worth of more than INR 4950/-, the offer made by the opposite parties , whereas on the other hand they have paid extra for baggage from Delhi to Amritsar. So the weight of the bag was 23 kg. Whereas the complainant in his complaint has stated that the price of the bag lost was Rs. 9000/- and its size was 26 inches and it was containing 4 winter suits of Rs. 60000/-, six pieces of pants and 4 shirts of Rs. 40000/- and 5 lady suits worth Rs. 1 lac. So both the complainant and his son were not aggreeing with the price of the bag lost as well as the contents of the bag. Ld.counsel for the opposite parties submitted that opposite parties were justified in offering compensation to the complainant @ Rs. 450/- per kg in all Rs. 4950/- to the complainant. As such there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.
8. From the entire above discussion we have come to the conclusion that complainant alongwith his wife Narinder Kaur Sandhu and grand daughter Ramneek Kaur Sandhu travelled from Calgory to New Delhi in British Airways which landed at New Delhi Terminal on 7.5.2012 as per ticket exbt.C-3. Thereafter complainant alongwith his wife Narinder Kaur Sandhu and grand daughter Ramneek Kaur Sandhu travelled from New Delhi to Amritsar in flight No. 9W2235 A&Q of Jet Airways on 7.5.2012 vide ticket exbt.C-1. The complainant had six bags which were over-loaded and the complainant had to pay extra baggage charges of Rs. 6000/- bearing ticket No. 5892600/96796 exbt.C-2 dated 7.5.2012. So it stands proved on record that all the six baggages were overloaded i.e having 23 kg weight or more than 23 kg weight. The complainant handed over six baggages to the opposite party at New Delhi Airport and the opposite party issued
-7-
boarding passes exbt.C-7 to C-11. The said flight arrived at Sri Guru Ram Das International Airport Amritsar at 12.30 p.m on 7.5.2012. When the complainant and his co-travellers reached at Amritsar Airport , they found one suitcase i.e. attache (baggage) was missing and the report exbt.C-12 to this effect was lodged by the complainant with opposite party No.3 and this fact has also been admitted by the opposite party vide e-mail dated 21.5.2012 exbt.OP1,2,3/2 as well as exbt.OP1,2,3/3 dated 29.5.2012, exbt.OP.1,2,3/5. So it stands fully proved on record that the opposite parties have failed to deliver one baggage to the complainant and as such the complainant has suffered loss due to loss of one of his six baggages due to lapse on the part of the opposite parties. As such, complainant is entitled to the amount of baggage and its contents as well as compensation from the opposite parties.
9. With regards to the contents of the baggage so lost by the opposite parties, the complainant in his complaint has alleged that the bag was of American Tourist of 26” size costing Rs. 9000/- and it was containing four winter suits valuing Rs. 60000/- , six pieces of pants and four shirts valuing Rs. 40000/- and 5 lady suits worth Rs. 1 lac. Whereas the opposite parties have produced on record e-mail issued by the son of the complainant namely Sarabjit Sandhu to the opposite parties exbt.OP1,2,3/3 stating the value of the bag as well as its contents in which he had stated that the value of the bag lost was Rs. 4000/- and it was containing new shoes, clothes and toys and all this worth more than Rs. 4950/-, the offer made by the opposite parties to the complainant as the amount of the baggage lost and its contents. So all this shows that the complainant and his family members are not sure about the contents of the baggage as well as the price of the bag because the opposite parties have stated that as per their record the bag so lost was of Samsonite brand and not American Tourist bag. The complainant has also not produced on record any bill or any evidence to prove that the said bag was containing 4 winter
-8-
suits of the value of Rs. 60000/-, 6 pieces of pants and 4 shirts of the value of Rs. 40000/- and 5 lady suits of the value of Rs. 1 lac. The averments of the complainant in the complaint are not supported by any congent evidence, oral or documentary rather the son of the complainant vide e-mail exbt.OP1,2,3/3 dated 29.5.2012 has made totally contradictory statement by stating the value of the bag was Rs. 4000/- only and it was containing shoes, clothes and toys. So we are of the opinion that the complainant has failed to prove on record as to what were the contents of the bag and what was the actual price of the bag , so lost. Opposite parties have admitted that they are liable to pay to the complainant for the loss @ Rs. 450/- per kg. The opposite parties have stated that the bag was containing weight of 11 kg only. But the opposite parties could not produce any evidence in this regard that the bag was containing only 11 kg weight. Whereas the documentary evidence produced by the complainant and issued by the opposite parties i.e receipt exbt.C-2 fully proves that all the six bags were containing either 23 kg weight or more than 23 kg weight i.e the bags were overloaded and the opposite parties have charged Rs. 6000/- as excess baggage fee. So we have to persume that the bag so lost must be containing 23 kg weight. As such the opposte parties are liable to pay Rs. 10350/- (Rs. 450/-x 23=Rs.10,350/-) to the complainant as the amount of the bag of the complainant so lost by the opposite parties and its contents. The complainant had suffered harassment and he had to buy new clothes as well as baggage, as such he has suffered loss mentally as well as financially. As such he is entitled to compensation. Opposite parties are also liable to pay compensation to the complainant as well as litigation expenses.
10. Consequently we partly allow the complaint with costs and the opposite partis are directed to pay Rs. 10350/- as price of the bag and its contents and Rs. 25000/- as compensation . Opposite parties are also directed to pay litigation expenses Rs.2000/- to the complainant. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free
-9-
of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
11. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
23.1.2015 ( Bhupinder Singh )
President
/R/ ( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)
Member
