This complaint is filed by the Complainants u/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice against the OP as the OP did not take any step to pay a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- due to loss of valuable article weighing approximately 150 grams costing about Rs.30,000/- per 10 grams contained in the checked-in-luggage at Airport till filing of this complaint.

The brief fact of the case of the Complainants is that they are the retired Government employees and senior citizen of India. They went at Dehradun to attend one marriage reception ceremony on the last week of November, 2014 and while they were returning from there to their residence at salt Lake, Kolkata on 22.12.2014 availing of the flight of Jet Lite, Flight no-9w 826 from Dehradun to Delhi and by connecting Jet Flight no-9w7059 from Delhi to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose International Airport, Kolkata, they were carrying two suitcases and before boarding in the flight the same were locked and sealed with the concern tag by the Airlines staff on duty. Before boarding while they were about to put their luggage for checking, the concerned staff requested them to put all the suitcases in check-in luggage as they will get very short time between the two connecting flights due to delay in leaving the aircraft from Dehradun and it will be easier for them to move with less number of hand luggage in the Airport for catching the connecting flight after reaching in Delhi. The Complainants have mentioned that the suitcases which they were carrying with them were actually a ‘Hand Luggage’ where they kept their valuable used gold jewelleries/ornaments which they were carrying with them for attending the said marriage ceremony and the hand luggage will perfectly fit in the bunk over the seat inside the aircraft (cabin luggage space). On good faith and being convinced with the advice given by the concerned person of the said Airlines the Complainants have handed over their all luggage to the Airlines concerned staff for x-ray checking/scanning and put the same in the checked-in luggage and finally the Complainants boarded in the flight after due scanning of the suitcases and collecting the luggage tag from the concerned staff. The said flight was running delay at the Jolly Grant Airport for one and half hour, caused trouble to them and ultimately they reached at the Kolkata Airport on 23.12.2014 at about 12.30 a.m. i.e. at midnight. The Complainants were exhausted and tired on their flight journey due to such delay and they just collected their luggage from the belt, which apparently was found in OK as there was no doubt of pilferage from the said checked-in luggage and they rushed to their home with the said luggage and ultimately they reached at home at around 1.30 a.m. to 2.00 a.m. As there was no need to take any contents on the said night from the said luggage they did no open any of them even after reaching at their home till the next day. When they open the said luggage with their utter surprise they found that the lock of the one bags was unsealed which at the then time they presumed that the incident might have been occurred due to luggage handling on transit. Just after opening the said luggage with utter dismay they noticed that a pouch containing some of their used gold jewelleries which was kept inside the said luggage have been tampered and some of the heavier gold ornaments like 08 Bangles, 02 Broad Kara and 01 Ruli weighing approximately 150 grams costing about Rs.30,000/- per 10 grams are missing from the said pouch and both the Complainants got tremendous shock and realized that they have been robbed by the loyal personnel engaged and entrusted at the Airport service for luggage handling. The approximate cost the missing ornaments from their suitcase was for Rs.4,50,000/-. Both the Complainants have realized and doubted that the persons may be involved in this dubious crime is/are the one who forced them to put their hand luggage in the checked-in-luggage and whereby they opted the scope to know what valuable materials they were carrying with them through the x-ray scanning process and both the Complainants are sure that the personnel entrusted for luggage handling utilized the time of delay in leaving the aircraft at Jolly Grant Airport to make this theft or this might have been happened any time during the flight journey from Airport to Airport. The Complainants immediately lodged complaint and reported the issue and brought the matter to the notice of the Airport Director, Jolly Grant Airport, Dehradun on 24.12.2014, but to no effect excepting an acknowledgment with a hope that ‘they are looking into the matter’. The Complainants have also forwarded the same complaint to the Air Traffic Control of India on 26.12.2014. Complaint was also lodged with the South Bidhannagar Police Station. But their all efforts went in vain. Due to dubious activity, deficient services of the employees of the concerned Airlines the Complainants have to suffer undue hardship and mental frustration. AS the OP did not take any step to resolve their grievance, hence finding no other alternative the Complainant have approached before the Ld. DCDRF, Barasat by filing this complaint praying for direction upon the OP to pay them a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- due to loss of valuable article weighing approximately 150 grams costing about Rs.30,000/- per 10 grams contained in the checked-in-luggage, to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.15,000/- to them.

The petition of complaint has been contested by the OP by filing written version denying the allegations as made out by the Complainants in the complaint petition.  According to the OP the complaint petition is liable to be dismissed.

Both parties have adduced their respective evidences and the Complainants were cross-examined by the OP by way of questionnaire and the Complainants have accordingly replied to the said questionnaire.

It is pertinent to mention that though initially this complaint was filed before the Ld. DCDRF, Barasat, after establishment of this Ld. Forum (Commission as amended w.e.f. 20.07.2020) the complaint has been transferred to this Ld. Commission from the Ld. Commission, Barasat in view of the order passed by the Hon’ble SCDRC. Before this Ld. Commission the Ld. Counsel for the Complainants has advanced argument. On the date of final argument none was present on behalf of the OP. However as the OP is contesting the complaint, the, we are under the obligation as per settled law to consider the written version of the OP.

We have carefully perused the entire record, documents as available and heard argument at length advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the Complainants.

At the very outset we are to say that this complaint has been filed by the Complainants against the Juristic Person only, the Chair/Post of the concerned Airlines has not been made party in this proceedings. Therefore if this complaint will dispose of in favour of the Complainants, then it will not be possible to execute the decree passed against the Juristic Person. From this point of view this complaint suffers from its defectiveness.

Secondly, it is noticed by us that this complaint is not filed supported by affidavit, it is filed on verification, which the settled law does not permit. In view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr. J. J. Merchant (supra) wherein Their Lordships have held that the petition of complaint, written version and the replies should be filed supported by affidavit. Therefore where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been pleased to settle the same, we have no authority to go beyond the said dictum/order. We have noticed that the OP has filed the written version on affidavit. So as the Complainants have violated the Law of this Land, we cannot encourage such action of the Complainants and hence the petition of complaint has no legal value in accordance with law or in the eye of law.

Inspite of this we are to say that the Complainants have miserably failed to adduce cogent evidence in support of their allegations. It is necessary to mention that in the evidence the Complainants have exaggerated the missing items, as alleged, which have not been mentioned in the petition of complaint. As per settled law evidence cannot go beyond the pleadings. In the petition of complaint (not supported by affidavit) the missing article was mentioned as 08 Bangles, 02 Broad Kara and 01 Ruli, but the evidence on affidavit the missing article have been mentioned as solid Bangles of Gold-08 nos, Broad Kara of Gold-02 nos, Ruli (Bala) of Gold-01 no, Pendent Sets of Glod-04 nos fitted with Pearl, Zircon, American Diamond, Garnet, Small Chain of Gold-02 nos, Pearl Neckless-01 no and Mangalsutra of Gold-01 no.

In our opinion where the Complainants were carrying such type of valuable ornaments, the same should be brought under an insurance coverage, but they did not insure their valuable items. Moreover as per the Airlines guidelines the valuable items, money, emergency medicines should be carried by the concerned passenger in their hand luggage, but in the instant case the Complainants put their valuable items in the check-in-luggage, which is totally prohibited and against the guidelines of Airlines. It is clear to us that the Complainants did not bother to comply with the guidelines/terms and conditions of the Airlines and hence due to such non-compliance in our view the Complainants are not entitled to get any relief from the OP.

Further the Complainants have left the Dum Dum Airport premises along with their luggage being satisfied with the same. If the luggage was received by them without the tag, then it was the duty of the Complainants to attract the notice of the Airport Authority then and there. But without doing so they went at their residence.  It is stated by the Complainants that on the next morning they found that the jewelry bag was missing. There is no iota of evidence that the Complainants put the said jewellery items/bag in the checked-in-luggage. Without any evidence we are not in a position to give relief to the Complainants.

Going by the foregoing discussion hence it is ordered that the Consumer Complaint being no-RBT/CC/136/2020 is hereby dismissed on contest without any cost.

Let plain copy of this judgment be given to the parties free of cost as per the CPR.          

Dictated and corrected by

[HON'BLE MRS. Silpi Majumder]
MEMBER