Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/212/2013

S.Stalin - Complainant(s)

Versus

Jet Airways (India) Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. STAB & Co

25 Jan 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 18.06.2013

                                                                          Date of Order : 25.01.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B., PGDCLP.               : MEMBER-I

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.212/2013

DATED THIS FRIDAY THE 25^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019

                                 

S. Stalin,

S/o. Mr. Subbarayan,

Plot No.645, LIG-II, TNHB,

Mambakkam Main Road,

Sithalapakkam,

Chennai – 600 073.                                                      .. Complainant.                                                        

 

                                                                             ..Versus..

 

1. M/s. Jet Airways (India) Limited,

Represented by its Branch Head,

Thapar House,

No.43/44, Montieth Road,

Egmore,

Chennai – 600 008. 

 

2. M/s. Jet Airways (India) Limited,

Represented by its Chief Executive Officer,

Siroya Centre, Sahar Airport Road,

Andheri (East),

Mumbai,

Maharasthra – 400 099.                                          ..  Opposite parties.

          

 

Counsel for complainant                       :   M/s. SPAB & CO.

Counsel for the opposite parties 1 & 2 :  M/s. Gupta & another

 

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of 1500 Malaysian Ringgits (approximately INR 27,000) the expenses incurred in Malaysia and to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- for the expenses incurred by making calls and visiting your offices in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia in Chennai and a sum of Rs.75,000/- for the cost of the baggage and things and to pay a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and sufferings with cost of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he availed the services of the opposite party by booking air ticket on 19.06.2012 to Kolalumbur a round trip ticket  from Chennai and boarded the flight after due checked in baggage of 12 Kg on 21.06.2012 in the opposite party’s flight.   The complainant submits that after reaching the destination at Kuala Lumpur, the complainant waited to receive the checked in baggage for more than 2 hrs.  But to his shock, the baggage was found missing.  Immediately, the complainant informed the opposite party office at Kuala Lumpur and filed a complaint vide reference KUL9W12803/21JUN12/0017/GMT.  The complainant submits that even after waiting for a long time, the opposite parties was not able to trace out the checked in baggage.   The complainant submits that due to the loss of the checked in baggage, the complainant purchased goods including dresses for daily use etc expending huge amount of Rs.27,000/-.  The complainant also expended a huge amount of Rs.30,000/- towards expenditure for transport and other things.   The complainant submits that even after requests and enquires made in person and email, the opposite parties was not able to trace out the checked in baggage.  The complainant submits that he issued legal notice dated:11.04.2013 for which, the opposite parties sent a reply admitting the loss of checked in baggage and come forward to settle the claim 20 USD per kg for 12 kgs.    The act of the opposite parties caused great mental agony.   Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties 1 & 2  is as follows:

The opposite parties 1 & 2 specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that the complainant travelled from Chennai to Malaysia with a checked in baggage bearing 12 Kg.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that after arrival at Kuala Lumpur, the complainant complained about the loss of checked in baggage weighing 12 kg.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that as per the opposite party Company Policy & General Policy, the passengers travelling with valuable articles have the restrictions to carry certain articles and shall declare the valuable items and certain items shall be carried along with themselves.  The opposite parties state that as per the terms and conditions for international baggage, the opposite parties offered USD of 240 (12 kgs X 20 USD).   The opposite parties state that the compensation claimed is highly exorbitant and arbitrary without any basis.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is filed and documents Ex.B1 to Ex.B3 are marked on the side of the opposite parties 1 & 2.

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,32,000/- towards expenses incurred in Malaysia and cost of baggage and things as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.1,00,000/- as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

Both parties filed their respective written arguments. Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.   Admittedly, the complainant availed ticket to Kolalumbur from Chennai and boarded the flight after due checked in baggage of 12 Kg on 21.06.2012 in the opposite party’s flight.  Ex.A2 is the Air ticket.  Further the contention of the complainant is that after reaching the destination at Kuala Lumpur, the complainant waited to receive the checked in baggage for more than 2 hrs.  But to his shock, the baggage was found missing.  Immediately, the complainant informed the opposite party office at Kuala Lumpur and filed a complaint vide reference KUL9W12803/21JUN12/0017/GMT.   But no document filed.   Further the contention of the complainant is that even after waiting for a long time, the opposite parties was not able to trace out the checked in baggage resulting great mental agony.  Further the contention of the complainant is that due to the loss of the checked in baggage, the complainant was constrained to purchase goods including dresses for daily use etc expending huge amount of Rs.27,000/-.  The complainant also expended a huge amount of Rs.30,000/- towards expenditure for transport and other things.  But on a careful perusal of records, Ex.A1 the complainant has produced several bills related to transport, restaurant, and super market and has not explained which bill amount is for dresses and what is the quantum of amount expended for transportation.  

6.     Further the contention of the complainant is that even after requests and enquires made in person and email, the opposite parties was not able to trace out the checked in baggage caused great loss and mental agony.  The allegation of the opposite parties is that the complainant has not lodged any complaint before the property irregularity report.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A6, the complainant has  given due complaints in such a manner and legal notice also issued dated:11.04.2013 as per Ex.A3 for which, the opposite parties sent a reply admitting the loss of checked in baggage and come forward to settle the claim 20 USD per kg for 12 kgs.  The complainant refused to accept for such settlement and filed this case claiming a sum of Rs.17,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony but has not produced any substantial proof for such huge claim.

7.     The contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that admittedly, the complainant travelled  from Chennai to Malaysia with a checked in baggage bearing 12 Kg.  The contention of the baggage has not been declared to the opposite party by the complainant at any point of time.  Further the contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that after arrival at Kuala Lumpur, the complainant complained about the loss of checked in baggage weighing 12 kg.  But the complainant has not bothered to file any property irregularity report.  On the other hand, the opposite parties itself commenced their duty to trace the complainant’s missing baggage which ended in vain.   Further the contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that as per the opposite party Company Policy & General Policy, the passengers travelling with valuable articles have the restrictions to carry certain articles and shall declare the valuable items.  Certain items shall be carried along with themselves.  In this case, the complainant has not disclosed the number of the items found in the checked in baggage which weigh 12 kgs.  Further the contention of the opposite parties that as per Ex.B2, the terms and conditions for international baggage, the opposite parties offered USD of 240 (12 kgs X 20 USD).   But the complainant not come forward to receive the amount.  The opposite parties has totally forgotten the consequences related to the loss of checked in baggage leading to purchase of several articles including dresses.  Equally, the opposite parties has not considered the different kind of transports involved for purchase and settling the complainant in a comfortable position.  The opposite parties has not denied in any where about the said expenses.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that the compensation claimed is highly exorbitant and arbitrary without any basis.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties 1 & 2 jointly and severally shall pay a sum of Rs.13,502/- (12 kgs x 20 USD = 240 USD as on 21.06.2012) and to pay a sum of Rs.27,000/- towards expenses for purchase of articles in order to keep the complainant comfort with a compensation of Rs.20,000/- and cost of Rs.5,000/-.

  In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.13,502/- (Rupees Thirteen thousand five hundred and two only), to pay a sum of Rs.27,000/- (Rupees Twenty seven thousand only) being expenses incurred towards purchase of articles in order to keep the complainant comfort and to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant. 

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 25^th day of January 2019. 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

		Copy of bills – restaurant / Supermarket etc
		Copy of Airticket
		Copy of the legal notice
		Copy of proof of delivery
		Copy of acknowledgement
		Copy of e-mail communications with Jet Airways

 

OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:- 

Ex.B1		Copy of the ticket sleeve’s
Ex.B2		Copy of the terms and conditions available in the website
Ex.B3	02.07.2013	Copy of reply given by the opposite parties to the legal notice dated:11.04.2013

 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT