Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 463.
Instituted on : 10.08.2017.
Decided on : 02.03.2020.
Jatin Sikka son of Sh. Satish Sikka resident of H.No.35/4, Shivaji Colony, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Sharp Travels India Ltd., 413/32 Shivaji Colony, Rohtak.
- TATA SIA Airlines Ltd. (Air Vistara) Corporate Office, 10th Floor, One Horizon Centre, Golf Course Road, Old Phase V, Sector-43,Gurgaon-122003 through its Manager.
- TATA Sia Airlines Ltd., Registered Office: Jeevan Bharti, Tower 1, 10th Floor, 124 Connaught Circus, New Delhi through its Manager.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
MS. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.R.S.Saini, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite party No.1 exparte.
Sh.Deepak Babbar, Advocate for opposite party No.2 & 3.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant had got a ticket booked from respondent no.1 for journey from Jammu to Sri Nagar for 1 July 2017. Therefore, he reached at the Airport, Jammu and travelled from Jammu to Srinagar on 01.07.2017. The complainant and his friends submitted three bags on Jammu Airport but at the time of receiving the same, complainant found that one of the bag was having less weight and when they reached in hotel, they found that his woolen tracksuit, raincoat, T-shirt, perfume, shampoo, face wash etc. and many other things were found missing. Complainant immediately informed the opposite parties and after that he went to Amarnath Yatra and his phone was switched off. On 02.07.2017 opposite parties informed the complainant through his family members that his luggage was found and as such on 04.07.2017, he collected the same. But due to missing of the above said articles, the complainant fell ill during Amarnath Yatra and also did not fulfill his Yatra because he was not having winter clothes. Complainant made complaints dated 05.07.2017, 06.07.2017, 07.07.2017 and 13.07.2017 to the opposite parties and respondents no.2 & 3 have sent a letter-email dated 16.07.2017 in which they have specifically mentioned that “we are extremely sorry for the inconvenience you had to face due to luggage misplace on your recent travel with us”. They have also mentioned in the alleged letter that “As a service recovery, we would like to offer the full refund of your ticket and also offer INR 1000 through NEFT”. It is thus very clear that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and as such complainant requested the opposite parties to compensate him but they refused to pay any heed to his requests. That the act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay the compensation of Rs.9 lacs alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. Notice of the present complaint was issued to the opposite parties. Notice sent to opposite party no.1 received back duly served but none appeared on behalf of OP no.1 and OP No. 1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 26.09.2017 of this Forum. Opposite party No.2 & 3 filed their written reply submitting therein that complainant booked flight in OPs airline from Jammu to Srinagar for 01.07.2017. The complainant submitted 3 bags in total at the check-in counter. On arrival at his destination, complainant collected his bags and left the airport. It is pertinent to note that no issues were raised by the complainant while of collecting the bags. The complainant later called the customer service of OP and informed that some of the contents of one of his bag were missing. Post investigation by OP, it was identified that the bag in question was overstuffed and as a result of which the zipper of the bag snapped and some of the contents of the bag fell out of the bag and the same was also informed to the complainant vide email dated 08.07.2017. The missing contents were found by the OP staff and OP immediately tried to contact the complainant, but were unable to get through. Thereafter, OP contacted the family members of the complainant so as to inform that the missing contents had been found and could be collected from the airport. On merits, it is submitted that the zipper of the bag snapped from one end, on its own account of it being overstuffed by the complainant, during transit, and some of the contents packed therein, spilled out from the bag. When the employee of the OP, learnt the same, he immediately clicked a picture of the same(in line with the airline policy) and closed the zipper of the said bag from the other end in order to prevent spilling of any other contents of the said bag. It is vehemently denied that the staff of the OP who had returned the spilled contents of the bag to the complainant, misbehaved with the complainant, as alleged or otherwise. Rather to the contrary, it was the staff of the OP who contacted the relatives of the complainant, conveyed about the spilled articles, requested the complainant to collect the same and in fact handed over the same to the complainant. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C8 and the evidence of complainant was closed by the order dated 27.08.2018 of this Forum. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite party No.2 & 3 in his evidence tendered affidavit Ex.RW2/A, documents Ex.R1W1/1 to Ex.R2W1/2 and closed his evidence on 04.12.2018.
4. We have heard ld. counsel for the parties and have gone through the material aspect of case.
5. As per the complainant himself, he lost his articles such as woolen tracksuit, raincoat, T-shirt, perfume, shampoo, face wash etc.. This fact has been admitted by the respondents in para no.2 of their written statement that the zipper of the bag of the complainant snapped from one end and some on its contents spilled out from the bag and nearby employees of the opposite parties immediately took some photographs of the incident and closed the zipper of the said bag from the other end in order to prevent spilling of any other contents of the said bag. Since the zipper had snapped from one end, the plastic seal affixed by the ground staff at the time of accepting the check-in baggage, remained intact. It is also admitted by the respondents that the complainant approached the respondent officials after reaching into the hotel and respondent officials enquired about the incident and conveyed a message to the complainant that he can collect his articles from the opposite party. The complainant collected all the remaining articles , which were slipped from the bag of the complainant from the opposite party on dated 04.07.2017. It shows that the officials of respondent no.2 & 3 have not properly maintain the bag and due to this impact, the zipper of the bag opened and the articles slipped from the bag. Moreover, if some contents of the bag have been slipped out from the bag, in that situation, the officials of the opposite party No.2 & 3 were duty bound to hand over the same to the complainant alongwith bag but the same has not been done in this case. Hence there is a deficiency in service on the part of respondents. The complainant wrote mail to the respondent officials regarding the inconvenience suffered by him during the trip because all the necessary clothes required for the holy trip were not with him. As per Ex.C5 the respondent officials apologies regarding the incident and offered the complainant that they will refund the ticket amount and also offered INR1000/- through NEFT. The respondents have not placed on record any document to prove that they have refunded any ticket amount or INR1000/- to the complainant till date. As per the email Ex.C5 itself, the complainant admitted this fact that his luggage has been refunded back to him and he further submitted in this mail that airlines authorities’ behavior was very rude and further pleaded that action may please be taken against the officials of the airlines authorities. In this complaint, complainant has also placed on record document Ex.C6, copy of his treatment sheet. The perusal of this treatment sheet itself shows that the complainant was suffering from breathlessness on dated 03.07.2017. Meaning thereby due to negligence of the opposite party, the bag was not intact and daily use items/winter clothes etc. required for the trip were not with the complainant, due to which he fell ill, and had to undergo treatment in the hospital. As such, the complainant has suffered mental agony and harassment due to deficiency in service of the opposite parties.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party no.2 & 3 to refund the amount of ticket and to pay compensation to the complainant. As the complainant has not mentioned the ticket amount in his complaint. Hence in these circumstances, we hereby direct the opposite party No.2 & 3 to pay a lump sum compensation of Rs.20000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only) on account of ticket amount, mental agony & harassment and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision, failing which opposite party no.2 & 3 shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. on the alleged awarded amount from the date of decision till its realization to the complainant.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
02.03.2020.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
