Delhi

New Delhi

CC/388/2009

Deepak Mathur & Anr. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Air Canada - Opp.Party(s)

02 Mar 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/388/09                                                                                                                                                                               Dated:

In the matter of:    

DEEPAK MATHUR, S/O. LATE SH. S.N. MATHUR

OFFICE ADDRESS:

E-260, G.K.-II, NEW DELHI – 110048

R/O.

E-78, ROAD 17, SAKET, NEW DELHI           

……..COMPLAINANT

         

VERSUS

1.     AIR CANADA

        146, WORLD TRADE CENTRE

        CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI.

 

2.     LUFTHANSA AIRLINES

        56, JANPATH, NEW DELHI

      ………. OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

ORDER

Member: S.R. Chaudhay

The case of the complainant is that on 16.1.2008, he was travelling to Toronto on Air Canada flight 847 from Munich to Canada.  Copy of boarding pass is at Annexure-A.  On reaching Toronto International Airport, the complainant realized that one of his baggages was missing as he had to check in baggage bearing No’s.LH 513811 and LH 513812.  It is alleged that one baggage with the tag No. LH 513811 was not loaded in the aircraft at all and copies of both the baggage tags are annexed as Annexure-B-Colly and on discovering that one of his baggage was missing, he reported to the OP-1, Air Canada counter and it is alleged that OP-1 informed him that his baggage was traced at Frankfurt but delivered to him in Canada on 18.1.2008 with a baggage tracing No.YYZ AC 95488 (Annexure-C).  On 24.1.2008, he filed a baggage declaration form and claim, mentioning that he was leaving for India on 31.1.2008, but OP-1 did not respond (Annexure-D-colly).  It is alleged that he had lost his clothes, warm clothes, toiletries, gifts that he had got for his relatives and he had to buy a lot of things and bills are at Annexure-E-Colly.  He underwent tremendous trauma and mental agony as he reached his relatives without any gifts and he had to buy a new suit for himself as he lost in the said baggage.  It is alleged that OP-1 asked him to come to the airport (in Canada) on 26.1.2008 to collect his baggage and he hired a taxi for 150 Canadian Dollars to reach the airport but didn’t get any baggage.  On 31.1.2008, as he was leaving Canada, he wrote a letter to Lufthansa Airlines (Annexure –F-Colly) as he had taken Lufthansa flight from Hanover to Munich before boarding the connecting flight and asked the authorities to reimburse the money.  On 13.2.2008, Lufthansa Airline (OP-2) responded the asked him to go through the same ordeal again as to where did he lose his bag etc. (Annexure-G-Colly) and again on 19.2.2008, OP-2 sent an email stating  that they would be sending his bag to Delhi and on 20.2.2008 in collected his long lost bag from the Airport (Annexure-H-Colly).    Complainant has stated that he received US $ 100/- from Bajaj Allianz Insurance, in lieu of the policy under which he was duly covered for travel assistance.  Now, he seeks Canadian Dollars 4,353.31 i.e. Rs.1,83,000/- in lieu of the claim made on 24.1.2008 and compensation for damages and harassment and litigation charges etc. and filed this complaint.

OP-1 (Air Canada) filed reply stating that the baggage was never handed over to Air Canada and the same was handed over to Lufthansa Airlines (OP-2) at Hanover and it is the duty and responsibility of Lufthansa Airlines (OP-2) to deliver the baggage and in case of failure to deliver the same, then to make the payment for compensation as the baggage was in care and custody of OP-2 throughout the missing period and ultimately delivered by OP-2 on 20.2.2008 and it stated that it is not liable to pay any compensation.

OP-2 (Lufthansa Airlines) filed reply stating that the complainant lodged a complainant of missing baggage with the OP-1 not with OP-2 which was able to trace the complainant’s baggage on its own, but the baggage was sent to complainant by OP-2 on 20.2.2008.  It has submitted that each passenger is under an obligation not to carry any valuables, business documents etc. in his/her checked baggage and if the complainant carried any valuable items, business documents etc. without declaring the same, then it was entirely at his own risk and responsibility and OP-2 cannot be held liable for the loss as the complainant has acted negligently.

We have heard the arguments and perused the complaint, reply, evidences of parties and documents on record and find that OP2 is held deficient as the baggage was left behind with it, when it no doubt traveled and sent to Complainant in Delhi. The Complainant has not deposed about any loss of the items from the received baggage, nor it is reported as found as found torn or with missing articles. In the Circumstances free suffered no loss due to late arriving of baggage. However, he spent some amount on purchases of essential items in Toronto, which are valued at 853 Canadian Dollars. We allow a total of Rs.30,000/- for there and in addition award a compensation of Rs.30,000/- for harassment, mental agony & litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

        Pronounced in open Court on 02.03.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(S.R. CHAUDHARY)                 (Ritu Garodia)

MEMBER                                  MEMBER