Delhi

New Delhi

CC/1318/2008

Alok Jain & Anr. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Malaysia Airlines - 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/1318/08                                                                                                                                                                             Dated:

In the matter of:

1. Mr. Alok Jain S/o Sh. N.C Jain,
2. Mr. Akash Jain S/o Sh. Alok Jain,

Both R/o 87, Rishab Vihar, New Delhi-110092

……..COMPLAINANTS

       

VERSUS

Malaysia Airlines,

Malaysia Airline System Berhad,

(Through its Station Manager Mr. Dhiraj Wadhwa),

City office at 16^th FL, Dr. Gopal Dass Bhavan,

28 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-110001

                 ……..OPPOSITE PARTY

 

ORDER

Member: S.R Chaudhary

The Complainant had availed the services of OP for a trip to Singapore on return to Delhi Airport; he found his luggage pilfered. The Complainant lodged at I.G Airport on 02.07.08 where he noticed that his luggage was pilfered and tampered and one web camera was missing as per report Exh.D and formal claim was lodged at Airport as per Exh.C but OP refused to honor the complainant demand the cost of camera & offer was given to complainant for 40USD as per Exh.D.

As per reply and evidence of OP reveals that complainant had booked 5 baggage weighed 82 kg but there was a loss of 2kg as admitted in Para4 of evidence. OP has offered as per international norms 40 USD @ 20 USD per kg under Carriage by Air Act 1972.

OP has taken plea that complainant had not declared about camera i.e. it is not covered. Therefore OP was liable OP inclined to compensate on the basis of weight loss of 2kg @ 20USD per kg.

We have considered the case. Complainant has placed on record in vow of 1300 US Dollars for purchased made in Singapore on 01.06.08. No doubt, if it was claim under Carriage by Air Act the less I payable by weight loss of baggage, but the Consumer Court have to look into deficiency, in perusing in taking care of goods, which is in custody of OP during travel.  The pilferage shows unauthorized opening of baggage by someone due to carelessness of OP. In view of this position, we allow claim of USD 1300 and award a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for harassment and litigation including lost of article in transit as complainant has been struggling since 2008.

 The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken against OP 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