Order by:
Smt.Aparana Kundi, Member
1. This Consumer Complaint has been received by transfer vide order dated 26.11.2021 of Hon’ble President, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab at Chandigarh under section 48 of CPA Act, vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2022 from District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana to District Consumer Commission, Moga to decide the same in Camp Court at Ludhiana and said order was ordered to be affected from 14th March, 2022.
2. The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) on the allegations that the complainant has medical appointment of his father-in-law at Chennai and he hired services of Opposite Party No.1 through Opposite Party No.2 by booking 5 tickets on 12.05.2016 for 17.05.2016 from Delhi to Chennai. The complainant paid Rs. 40,580/- for the said tickets and the same was disclosed and confirmed by Opposite Party No.2 and he has also issued printed electronic ticket bearing no. ZETE7U. The departure was from Delhi on 17.05.2016 to Chennai and the complainant was accompanied by Mr. Kamalsher Singh Tatla, Mr. Somaljeet Singh Virk, Mr. Dilbag Singh & Mr. Kulwant Singh. Time of departure of the flight was 06:55 AM & it has to reach at about 09:45 AM at Chennai. The complainant and other persons who were travelling handed over their entire luggage to the officials of the Opposite Party No.1 as per the prevailing rules of the air-flights. After that the complainant along with other persons boarded to plane and few hours later all of them reached at Chennai. After that as they were waiting to take their luggage and then they saw that one of the bag was missing. They asked the officials of the Opposite Party No.1 and other officials on counter who was present at that time at Chennai airport where-about the missing bag. Then after sometime the officials of the Opposite Party told the complainant that the bag could not be found and it has been lost. The complainant along with other persons went to Chennai for medical checkup of Mr. Dilbag Singh (father-in-law of the complainant) who was also travelling with the complainant. Both the kidneys of Mr. Dilbag Singh were damaged and he is in-door and out-door patient of Shivalik Hospital, Chandigarh. But the doctors of the Shivalik Hospital, Chandigarh advised him to get check up of his kidneys from Chennai Hospital. The bag which has been lost from the custody of the Opposite Party No.1, it contains clothes, a gift of more than Rs. 1 lac and all the medical documents of Mr. Dilbag Singh and these all medical documents are very much necessary for further treatment from the Chennai hospital with regard to Kidneys of Mr. Dilbag Singh because in the absence of said documents/medical record, the doctors of the Chennai hospital are unable to provide proper treatment to Mr.Dilbag Singh which caused heavy physically and mental loss. As that bag has been lost from the Opposite Party No.1, the complainant could not get any kind of help or medical advice from the doctors of the Chennai as all the reports or the medical documents were lying in that bag. On the same day i.e. 17.05.2016, complainant again booked tickets from Chennai to Delhi from Opposite Party No.2 by paying an amount of Rs.31,492.25/-. Flight departure time was 04:15 AM & arrival time was 07:00 AM on 18.05.2016. The complainant along with other persons came back from Chennai to Delhi by taking flight of IndiGo airlines. The complainant also got a Baggage Irregularity Report bearing no.29080 from the Opposite Party duly signed by the complainant and the official of the Opposite Party No.1 on 17.05.2016. The complainant also sent e-mails to the Opposite Party No.1 regarding the loss of the bag from the custody of the Opposite Party No.1 on airport at Chennai. In reply to the emails, Opposite Party No.1 offered Rs.3,000/- to complainant as compensation, which was not acceptable to the complainant. Thereafter complainant served notice dated 22.08.2016 through his counsel on same day and the notice was duly served upon the Opposite Parties. After receipt of notice the Opposite Party No.1 contacted the complainant and assured him to settle the matter as soon as possible. But thereafter put the matter under one pretext or the other and till today Opposite Parties failed to make the payment of compensation to the complainant despite the receipt of notice. Moreover the complainant suffered heavy, monetary loss of Rs. 1,72,072/- as a payments of tickets and gift which become fruitless for the complainant and it does not serve any purposes. The documents i.e. which were medical reports obtained by the complainant by paying heavy amount to the doctors and the same cannot be assessed in the terms of money. Hence this complaint. Vide instant complaint complainant has sought the following reliefs:-
a) Opposite parties may be directed to refund the amount of tickets as well as gift i.e. Rs.1,72,072/-.
b) To pay an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension and harassment.
c) To pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- as litigation costs.
2. Upon service of notice, none has come present on behalf of Opposite Party No.1, hence Opposite Party No.1 was proceeded against exparte.
3. Opposite Party No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written reply taking preliminary objection therein inter alia that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the present complaint. Admittedly, the luggage of the complainant was lost at Chennai due to the own negligence of the complainant. No part of cause of action has accrued to the complainant at Ludhiana. Hence, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the present complaint. The complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the present complaint. The luggage was lost due to the negligence of the complainant. The answering opposite party was not traveling with the complainant nor handling or taking care of luggage of the complainant nor the answering party is providing any such services to its customers. The role of the answering party was to book the tickets for the complainant. Admittedly the complainant was provided seat in the plane on the ticket booked by the answering party and at this very moment, the role of the answering party ceases to exist. In case the Spice Jet Ltd. does not provide any services to the complainant, the answering party cannot be held responsible for the same since the answering party is selling the tickets of all the airlines. It is specifically opted and chosen to book a flight complainant who had in the plane of Spice Jet Ltd. being easily affordable. Now in case the airlines does not provide services to the complainant, then the answering party cannot be held responsible for the same. Thus, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The complaint is bad for mis joinder of the necessary parties. The answering party is neither a proper nor necessary party in the present complaint. The complainant has not come to the court with clean hands and he is guilty of suppression of true, actual and material facts from this Forum (now Commission). Thus, the complainant is not entitled to any relief whatsoever from this District Consumer Commission. No cause of action has accrued to the complainant against the answering party to file the present complaint and the same is liable to be dismissed. On merits, it is submitted that Opposite Party No.2 is not the official agent of the Opposite Party No.1. The payment of Rs.40,580/- is not denied. However, the services were provided by the Opposite Party No.2 to the complainant against the said payment and the booking of the complainant was confirmed in the airline. Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint is made.
4. In order to prove his case, complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C13.
5. We have gone through the documents placed on record. The case of the complainant is that he has medical appointment of his father-in-law at Chennai and he hired services of Opposite Party No.1 through Opposite Party No.2 by booking 5 tickets on 12.05.2016 for 17.05.2016 from Delhi to Chennai. The complainant paid Rs. 40,580/- for the said tickets. Time of departure of the flight was 06:55 AM & it has to reach at about 09:45 AM at Chennai. The complainant and other persons who were travelling handed over their entire luggage to the officials of the Opposite Party No.1. After that the complainant along with other persons boarded to plane and few hours later all of them reached at Chennai. After that as they were waiting to take their luggage and then they saw that one of the bag was missing. They asked the officials of the Opposite Party No.1 and other officials on counter who was present at that time at Chennai airport where-about the missing bag. Then after sometime the officials of the Opposite Party told the complainant that the bag could not be found and it has been lost. The complainant along with other persons went to Chennai for medical checkup of Mr. Dilbag Singh (father-in-law of the complainant) who was also traveling with the complainant. Both the kidneys of Mr. Dilbag Singh were damaged and he is in-door and out-door patient of Shivalik Hospital, Chandigarh. But the doctors of the Shivalik Hospital, Chandigarh advised him to get check up of his kidneys from Chennai Hospital. The bag which has been lost from the custody of the Opposite Party No.1, it contains clothes, a gift of more than Rs. 1 lac and all the medical documents of Mr. Dilbag Singh and these all medical documents are very much necessary for further treatment from the Chennai hospital with regard to Kidneys of Mr. Dilbag Singh because in the absence of said documents/medical record, the doctors of the Chennai hospital are unable to provide proper treatment to Mr.Dilbag Singh which caused heavy physical as well mental loss. As that bag has been lost from the Opposite Party No.1, the complainant could not get any kind of help or medical advice from the doctors of the Chennai as all the reports or the medical documents were lying in that bag. On the same day i.e. 17.05.2016, complainant again booked tickets from Chennai to Delhi from Opposite Party No.2 by paying an amount of Rs.31,492.25/-. The complainant along with other persons came back from Chennai to Delhi by taking flight of IndiGo airlines. The complainant also got a Baggage Irregularity Report bearing no.29080 from the Opposite Party duly signed by the complainant and the official of the Opposite Party No.1 on 17.05.2016. The complainant also sent e-mails to the Opposite Party No.1 regarding the loss of the bag from the custody of the Opposite Party No.1 on airport at Chennai. In reply to the emails, Opposite Party No.1 offered Rs.3,000/- to complainant as compensation, which was not acceptable to the complainant. On the other hand, ld. counsel for opposite party no.2 contended that the role of Opposite Party No.2 was to book the tickets for the complainant. Admittedly the complainant was provided seat in the plane on the ticket booked by Opposite Party No.2 and at this very moment, the role of Opposite Party No.2 ceases to exist. In case the Spice Jet Ltd. does not provide any services to the complainant, 2 cannot be held responsible for the same since the answering party is selling the tickets of all the airlines. However, Opposite Party No.1 did not opt to appear and contest the proceedings. Hence, Opposite Party No.1 was proceeded exparte. To corroborate his aforesaid assertion, the Complainant has placed on record his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CA, alongwith copies of legal notices Ex.C1 & Ex.C2 sent to the opposite parties, Ex.C5 is copy of the Baggage Irregularity Report, copy of air ticket Ex.C6, copy of air tickets from Chennai to Delhi is Ex.C7 and copies of medical records of Dilbag Singh (father in law of complainant) are Ex.C8 to Ex.C12 and copy of e-mails are Ex.C13. Perusal of email dated 26th July 2016 revels that opposite party no.1-Spice Jet offered Rs.3000/- to complainant regarding his loss of baggage. The relevant portion of that email is reproduced “As mentioned in our website “The Carrier’s liability for loss or damage to baggage is limited to Rs.200 per kg with maximum of Rs.3000/- only. The carrier assumes no liability for fragile or perishable articles”. The aforesaid evidence produced by the complainant has gone unrebutted and unchallenged through any cogent and convincing evidence on record as the Opposite Party No.1 did not opt to appear and contest the proceedings. Moreover, Opposite Party No.2 failed to tender its evidence. In this way, the Opposite Parties have impliedly admitted the correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. It also shows that Opposite Parties have no defence to offer or defend the complaint.
6. So, from the entire unrebutted and unchallenged evidence produced by the complainant on record, it stands fully proved on record that the Opposite Parties have adopted unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. Moreover from the emails placed on record by complainant it is evident that Opposite Party No.1 admitted its negligence regarding loss of the baggage. However, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party No.2, as they are not the agent of Opposite Party No.1, rather they are only the seller of tickets.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the complaint, the present complaint against Opposite Party No.2 stands dismissed and we partly allow the complaint of the complainant against Opposite Party No.1. Opposite Party No.1 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) as lump sum compensation to the complainant alongwith interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint i.e. 01.11.2017 till its actual realization. Compliance of this order be made by Opposite Party No.1 within 60 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which the Complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Commission. All applications pending before this District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, if any, stand disposed off accordingly. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana and thereafter, the file be consigned to record room after compliance.
13. Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.
This Consumer Complaint was originally filed at District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Now Commission) at Ludhiana and it keep pending over there until Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2022 has transferred the instant Consumer Complaint alongwith Other Complaints to District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Moga with directions to work on this file onward from 14th March, 2022 and accordingly District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Moga has decided the present complaint at Camp Court, Ludhiana, as early as possible.
Announced in Open Commission at Camp Court, Ludhiana.
Dated:29.09.2022
