BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. P. SUDHIR                                       :  PRESIDENT

SMT. R. SATHI                                         :  MEMBER

SMT. LIJU B. NAIR                                  : MEMBER

C.C. No. 20/2013 Filed on 15.01.2013

ORDER DATED: 22.01.2016

Complainant:

Niyas, S/o Abdul Rahuman, residing at Najumal Manzil, Edavanasseri, Mynagappally P.O, Kollam.

                                   (By Adv. Nisa Fasil)

Opposite parties:

1. M/s Kuwait Airways represented by its Chairman & Managing Director through authorized Signatory at branch office of Kuwait Airways, Terminal-2, Trivandrum International Airport, Thiruvananthapuram, Room No. 15/47, Diamond Hill, Vellayambalam, Thiruvananthapuram-695 010.
2. Chief Executive Officer, M/s Kuwait Airways, represented through its authorized signatory at Branch Office of Kuwait Airways, Terminal-2, Trivandrum International Airport, Thiruvananthapuram, Room No. 15/47, Diamond Hill, Vellayambalam, Thiruvananthapuram-695 010.
3. The Trivandrum Branch Chief Executive Officer, Branch office of Kuwait Airways, Terminal-2, Trivandrum International Airport, Thiruvananthapuram, Room No. 15/47, Diamond Hill, Vellayambalam, Thiruvananthapuram-695 010.

(By Adv. A. Abdul Kharim)

This C.C having been heard on 23.11.2015, the Forum on 22.01.2016 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. R. SATHI:  MEMBER

In this instant case complainant, believing the opposite parties and attracted by the service rendered by them during discussion etc., joined in a group ticket of 8 persons and obtained ticket for his journey from Riyadh to Thiruvananthapuram in flight No. KU 331 via Kuwait on 29.12.2012.  The scheduled time of departure of flight from Riyadh airport is scheduled to be at 6.55 pm on 29.12.2012 and it will reach at Kuwait airport at 8.30 pm.  From Kuwait they arranged a connection flight to Trivandrum which is scheduled to be departed at 8.55 pm.  All the passengers including the complainant boarded into the flight in time.  But there occurred a delay of 35 minutes caused in taking off the flight from Riyadh airport and flight departed from Riyadh airport only at 7.30 pm.  The flight reached at Kuwait airport only at 9.30 pm and in the meantime the connection flight was departed against the assurance made by the opposite party.  The complainant came to know about the connection flight only when he reached Kuwait airport.  An alternate arrangement was provided by the opposite party by providing a connection flight going to Bombay and from there they also agreed to provide flight to reach Trivandrum as an alternative arrangement.  On 30.12.2012 at 1.15 am the complainant was boarded in a Bombay flight with his baggage and he reached at the Mumbai airport at 7.30 am on 30.12.2012.  As an alternative arrangement opposite party agreed to board complainant in domestic airlines run by the Jet Airways which is to be departed at 10.55 am and will reach at Trivandrum airport at 12.55 pm.  The Jet Airways authorities declined to board the complainant in their airways on the ground that in domestic airlines baggage of 20 kg alone is permissible and for extra baggage complainant has to provide an additional amount of Rs. 40,000/-.  The complainant was not keeping cash with him and he could not afford such a huge amount.   Complainant contacted the opposite party and he was taken to the Air India Terminal along with his baggage and was boarded in Air India flight at 6.30 am on 31.12.2012.  On reaching the Trivandrum Airport complainant came to know that his baggage containing valuables worth Rs. 4 lakhs was missing.  The matter was immediately reported to the opposite party, but the baggage was not returned.  Hence the complainant approached this Forum to direct the opposite parties to return the missing baggage of the complainant failing which complainant may be allowed to realize an amount of Rs. 4 lakhs with interest at 12% per annum from opposite parties along with Rs. 4 lakhs as compensation for mental agony and sufferings with costs. 

The opposite parties accepted notice, entered appearance and filed version. 

The opposite parties in their version admits that the complainant along with 7 others purchased Kuwait Airways tickets for their travel and due to technical snag the departure of flight was delayed for about half an hour and when the flight from Riyadh reached Kuwait the flight to Trivandrum took off and hence the complainant could not travel in the said flight.   The opposite party made all possible arrangements and rerouted the complainant via Mumbai for onward travel to Trivandrum on 30.12.2012.  The opposite party booked for travel of the complainant from Mumbai to Trivandrum by way of Jet Airways, but the said airways authorities off loaded the passengers on the ground of their excess baggage claiming extra charge.  The opposite party immediately made alternative arrangement by transferring the complainant and others to Air India airlines flight to Trivandrum and the excess baggage charges were borne totally by Kuwait Airways.  The airlines had taken all precautionary measure possible to safeguard the interest of all the passengers.  There is no willful latches or deficiency of service on the part of this opposite parties.  There was no complaint of missing of baggage while he travelled from Riyadh to Mumbai and Kuwait Airways is not at liable for lost baggage while travelling on the domestic sector.  As per rules the passenger is required to declare the content and its value of the checked in baggage at the time of checked in and require to pay a supplementary sum to airlines.  The complainant had not declared the content and value of the check in baggage and hence the liability of the airlines is limited to 20 US dollars per kg.  Complainant had not lodged PIR with the opposite parties and opposite party is unaware of the total weight of missing baggage and hence these opposite parties are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant.  The complaint is only to be dismissed. 

Complainant filed affidavit and submitted that complainant has no oral evidence and no documents marked.  Opposite party has also no evidence. 

Issues:

1. Whether there is any deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the side of opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for any compensation as sought for?

Issues (i) & (ii):- The complainant filed this complaint to direct the opposite parties to return the missing baggage of the complainant or for allowing the complainant to realize an amount of Rs. 4 lakhs with interest @ 12% per annum from the opposite parties and Rs. 4 lakhs towards compensation.  The complainant joined in a group ticket of 8 persons and obtained ticket for journey from Riyadh to Trivandrum via Kuwait.  But delay occurred in taking off the flight from Riyadh and due to that delay the complainant did not get the connection flight from Kuwait to Trivandrum.  The opposite parties arranged Air India flight and he reached Trivandrum airport by Air India flight.  On reaching Trivandrum he came to know that he lost one of his baggage containing valuables and same was complained before Air India and copy of irregularity report was also produced and the same was not marked as the complainant failed to mention in the affidavit.  The complainant did not state the actual weight of baggage in his complaint or affidavit.  In para 14 of the affidavit he stated that one of his baggages containing valuables worth Rs. 4 lakhs was missing.  From the Property Irregularity Report produced by the complainant, the weight of the baggage was not clear.  The opposite parties contended that they have no knowledge about the loss of baggage and the Air India to trace out the missing baggage after property irregularity report is lodged with them by the complainant.  Here Air India is not in party array.  But we cannot consider the contention of opposite parties to that extent because the complainant did not directly approach the Air India.  The opposite parties made arrangements for travelling in Air India due to the delay in their flight.  As per Carriage by Air Act the airline’s liability is up to a sum of 20 US dollars per kilogram.  Here the complainant failed to prove his case on that aspect.  So weight of the checked baggage cannot be considered for determining the compensation.  But on going through evidence, it is clear that there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the opposite parties’ side and opposite parties are liable to pay compensation.  So opposite parties are directed to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- along with cost of Rs. 2,500/- to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order. 

In the result, complaint is partly allowed, by directing the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) along with costs of Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees Two thousand five hundred only) within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which opposite parties shall pay 12% interest for the amount of Rs. 10,000/- from the date of default till payment. 

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room. 

          Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 22^nd day of January 2016

.

       Sd/-

R. SATHI                               : MEMBER

      Sd/-

P. SUDHIR                            : PRESIDENT

      Sd/-

                                                                        LIJU B. NAIR                        : MEMBER

jb