Date of Filing: 05/08/2011
Date of Order: 19/09/2011
BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE - 20
Dated: 19th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2011
PRESENT
SRI.H.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO,B.SC.,B.L., PRESIDENT
SRI.KESHAV RAO PATIL, B.COM., M.A., LL.B., PGDPR, MEMBER
SMT.NIVEDITHA .J, B.SC.,LLB., MEMBER
COMPLAINT NO. 1452 OF 2011
1. Sri. A. Munisanjeevappa,
S/o. Late Abbayappa,
Aged About 63 years,
2. Mrs. N. Pramila Devi,
W/o. A.Munisanjeevappa,
Aged About 56 years,
3. Master. M. Amit,
Minor, Rep. by his Guardian
& Grand Father Sri. A.Munisanjeevappa.
All the above 1, 2 & 3 are R/at:
No.1, 1st Cross, Rajeev Gandhi Road,
Jaraganahalli, Bangalore-560 078.
(Rep. by Advocate Sri.Abhinav.R.) Complainants.
-V/s-
M/s. Kingfisher Airlines,
No.401, Eden Park, No.20,
M.G. Road, Bangalore-560 001.
Rep. by its Director.
(Rep. by Advocate Sri.C.K.Nandakumar) Opposite party.
BY SRI.H.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO, PRESIDENT
ORDER
The brief antecedents that lead to the filing of the complainant made Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, seeking direction to the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.1,52,500/-, are necessary:-
The complainants had booked tickets in the airlines of the opposite party in Flight No. IT-211 on 27.12.2010 from Bangalore to Indore Via Delhi and the complainants were put on connecting flight No. IT-4397 to Indore at Delhi. The complainants checked in their four baggages at Bangalore. The baggages numbers IT-161578, 79, 80 & 81. At Indore baggage No.IT-161578 was not delivered to the complainants it was reported to the personnel of the opposite party at Indore, who under took to search and trace out the baggage. Thereafter the complainants checked in to the Hotel Radison at Indore, later they were informed that the said baggage was not received at Indore and it was declared as lost. The complainants issued delayed bag information with file Reference No. IDR-1T10096 to the effect that one baggage of Samsonite suite case with Tag No. IT-161578 has not been traced and is declared as lost. The said baggage contained one suite, one odd coat, 8 shirts, 8 T-shirts, 8 pants, 3 Shawls, 1 pair of Rebok Shoes, thermals, three silk sarees apart from the cosmetics/toiletries and also important documents and cash of Rs.2,000/- which was kept for emergency purpose. The opposite party offered a meager compensation of Rs.2,000/- as immediate compensation. The total value of the goods and cash was Rs.77,500/-. The complainant issued a notice to the opposite party on 16.01.2011 and on 27.01.2011. Hence the complaint seeking payment of Rs.77,500/- the actual loss and Rs.75,000/- as compensation and costs.
2. In brief the version of the opposite party are:-
The travelling of the complainants, handing over baggages, loss of one baggage are all admitted. The complainants have received Rs.2,000/- as immediate compensation on 27.12.2010 itself. The remaining claim of compensation is to be settled as per the provisions of the Carriage By Air Act 1972. The complainant could well have obtained insurance for the goods which they were carrying if they were indeed valuable. They are also negligent in this regard. The said baggage weighed 14 kgs. Hence under the Act opposite party are liable to pay Rs.450/- per Kg and not more. Hence the total compensation could not be more than this i.e., Rs.2,000/- they have already been received.
3. To substantiate their respective cases, the parties have filed their respective affidavits and documents. The arguments were heard.
4. The points that arise for our consideration are:-
- What is the compensation the complainants are entitled?
- What order?
5. Our findings on the above points are:-
Point (A) to (B):As per the final order
For the following:-
REASONS
POINT (A) to (B):-
6. Reading the pleadings in conjunction with the affidavit and documents on record, it is an admitted fact that the complainants are the husband, wife and children who travelled from Bangalore to Indore Via New Delhi on 27.12.2010 in the Air Craft of opposite party. They had checked in their four baggages to together. These baggages should have been delivered to the complainants at Indore. It is also an admitted fact that one baggage of the complainant a Samsonite suite case containing one suite, one odd coat, 8 shirts, 8 T-shirts, 8 pants, 3 Shawls, 1 pair of Rebok shoes, thermals, three silk sarees apart from the cosmetics/toiletries and important documents and a cash of Rs.2,000/- was not delivered to the complainant at Indore. On giving complaint it was informed that it was not received at Indore ad they declared it as lost. In this regard when the complainant was given a token compensation of Rs.2,000/- at Indore. This is the negligence on the part of the opposite party and this is the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. These are all admitted.
7. The only contention of the opposite party is under the Carriage by Air Act 1972 they are liable to pay the compensation at the rate of Rs.450/- per Kg that is for 14 kgs it is Rs.6,300/-. Hence they are liable to pay the balance of Rs.4,300/- only, since the value of the goods has not been declared and it was not insured. This is an untenable contention. The complainants are not carrying any jewellary or any material which is suppressed to be very costly and luxury item. It is a common practice that a suitcase containing cloths are being carried. It cannot be declared, the insurance is left to the option of the complainants. Here the goods have been carried by the opposite party on taking money from the complainants. For their travel the complainants are entitled to take certain baggages which has to be carried by the opposite party and it has to be delivered to the complainant at their destination that has not been done, this is deficiency in service. For deficiency in service the Air Carriage Act 1972 does not prescribe any compensation.
8. In any event the complainants have checked in their baggages at Bangalore Airport, where the baggages are scanned and what are the materials that are there in the baggages is known to the personnel of the opposite party who have scanned it. There are CC TV at all airports. They how can the baggage of the complainant is lost? Where it is lost? How it is lost? There is no answer from the opposite party. The baggage is not received at Indore though it was taken by the opposite party at Bangalore. Then how could it be lost, unless an unfair trade practice has been committed by the opposite party in knocking of the baggage containing the cloths and other things. Here the complainants have not declared the value of the goods. Admittedly regarding cloths nobody is expected to declare the value of the cloths or shoes or the suitcase that is humanly impossible. The people rushes to the airport at the correct time, check in the baggages, collect the boarding passes, enter to the aircraft; where is the time for anything else. Even opposite party at the time of checking in the baggages has not informed the complainant to declare the value of the baggage. They could have done it, that has not been done by any of the personnel of the opposite party while receiving the baggages at the airport. The deficiency in service is thus on the opposite party itself. Now we have to see what is the compensation that has to be awarded to the complainant.
9. Here the complainants have not produced any scrap of paper to show what is the value of the goods they were carrying on that day and what was the value of each of the articles that was there in the suitcase nor the value of the suitcase it is only an assumption. Hence under these circumstances if we direct the opposite party to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service along with costs of this litigation we think that will meet the ends of justice. Hence we hold the above points accordingly and proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
1. The complaint is Allowed-in-part.
2. The opposite party is directed to pay to the complainant sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation within 30 days from the date of this order.
3. The opposite party is also directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.2,000/- as costs of this litigation.
4. The opposite party is directed to send the amounts as ordered at Serial Nos. 2 & 3 above to the complainant through DD by registered post acknowledgment due and submit the compliance report to this Forum with necessary documents within 45 days from the date of this order.
5. Return the extra sets filed by the parties to the concerned as under Regulation 20(3) of the Consumer’s Protection Regulation 2005.
6. Send a copy of this order to both the parties free of costs, immediately.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 19th Day of September 2011)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
