| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BATHINDA C.C.No. 339 of 17-12-2019 Decided on : 01-06-2023 Robin Goyal aged about 24 years S/o Sh. Naresh Kumar Goyal, R/o Railway Street, Near Railway Station Goniana Mandi, Bathinda. ........Complainant Versus SpiceJet Limited, 319, Udhyog Vihar, Phase IV, Gurgaon, Haryana, through its Chairman & Managing Director. .......Opposite party Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 QUORUM Sh. Lalit Mohan Dogra, President Sh. Shivdev Singh, Member Present : For the complainant : Sh. Varun Bansal, Advocate. For opposite party : Sh. Chander Mohan, Advocate. ORDER Lalit Mohan Dogra, President The complainant Robin Goyal (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, ( Now C.P. Act, 2019 here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this forum (Now Commission) against SpiceJet Limited (here-in-after referred to as opposite party). Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant on 6.6.2019 (booking ID NSGHY9RTZ), booked flight No.SG8172 having PNR- HY9RTZ with seat No.24A (departure from GOA to Delhi Arrival on 11th of July,2019) and made entire payment through HDFC Bank Credit Card vi online facility from Bathinda itself. At the time of departure from GOA Airport, complainant luggage (US Polo Assn Leather Bag), had been CHECHED-IN by the opposite party and same was in exellent condition and even all the things placed in the said bag was also in exellent condition. On dated 11-7-2019, after his arrival at New Delhi Airport, the complainant noticed that his said luggage/bag was damaged and even the things into the said bag/luggage was in broken and damaged condition. Due to the broken/damagd condition of said luggage and things inside the luggage are not in condition for further use. It is alleged that subsequently on the spot, complainant tried to approach the opposite party's counter at the Delhi Airport to register his complaint/ grievance regarding the damaged condition of the said luggage/bag and other things and about the mishandling done by the opposite party and one of the employee of opposite party asked to complainant to raise the complaint/issue online instead of opposite party's counter and assured that they will give earlier & best possible solution of the complainant's grievance. Accordingly on dated 12-7-2019, complainant had raised his complaint at the site of the consumer complaint but no revert had been given. Further on dated 21-7-2019, the complainant also sent his mail at The complainant alleged that on dated 25-8-2019, complainant had once again sent an E-mail to the opposite party about his compensation status Ref NO.03895879, but once again the Automated responce was generated and no reply was given by the opposite party subsequently on 3rd of sepetember, 2019 the complainant once again sent E-Mail as Reminder of previous E-mail but again an automated Response was repeated and no action was taken by the opposite party. On dated 19-09-2019, the opposite party had replied to the complainant via ID: YW988586 (Spicejet Baggage) that "This is with the reference to your travelling email regarding Baggage handling dated 11-07-2019. The management is concerned to note your feedback regarding spicejet's baggage handling, we would like to apologize for the inconvenience caused. As per the pictures of baggage, we would like to inform you that a thorough investigation was conducted and compensation was advised accordingly. Further, in order to mitigate the inconvenience caused, we would like to offer you voucher worth INR 500 to you for your future travel with Spicejet. Please provide your acceptance on the same". It is further alleged that the complainant had told the opposite party about his damages and also told that he will not travel with the opposite party in future as opposite party is doing mishandling of the luggage's of passenger, but opposite party is trying to bound the complainant by issuing him the future voucher of just Rs.500/- which is applicable on future travel booking and enforcing the complainant to visit with opposite party in future. On the act of the opposite party, the complainant had issued a legal notice via Sh.Ashu Bansal, Advocate, Disst Courts Bathinda vide dated 01-10-2019 so that he could be compensated in well manner without further harassment. But opposite party has not even given any respond on the legal notice which clearly shows that the opposite party has nothing to say in this matter. The opposite party is not even trying to contact the complainant after this. It seems that opposite party is not interested to give any compensation to the complainant for this loss and mishandling and even tried to put the matter on one or other pretext. This all shows the negligence, deficient services and comes under unfair trade practices by opposite parties. The opposite parties has harassed the complainant and they have to make good the losses suffered by the complainant. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to pay compensation as sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for causing harassment, mental agony and pain and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses and impose the suitable penalty/fine on the opposite party for the said type of mishandling. Upon notice, opposite party appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply raising preliminary objections that the present complaint filed on behalf of the complainant is not maintainable in as much as the complainant has not approached this Hon'ble Forum with clean hands and has suppressed material facts from this Hon'ble Forum. In view of the aforesaid facts, the complaint of the above said complainant is liable to be dismissed. That the present complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable in as much as, by way of present complaint, the complainant is trying to take benefits of its own misdeeds and malafide acts. It is submitted that having booked the ticket, the Complainant, who was well aware and conversant about the terms and conditions contained in the e ticket. It is submitted that the relevant clauses of the terms and conditions contained in the said ticket. In case, the passenger decides to carry any valuables in their checked in baggage, against the above advice, they will do this at their own risk and shall not hold Spiceiet responsible for any pilferage/damage/etc. to such valuables. BAGGAGE • SpiceJet assumes no liability for wear and tear to luggage (scratches, torn zippers, straps, wheels, handles, scuffs, dents, soiling or manufacturer defects). • SpiceJet highly recommends that you remove all valuables (cameras, jewelry, money, electronics, perishables, etc.) and medication from your check-in luggage and place them in your carry-on. SpiceJet will not accept responsibility for these items. • In case, the passenger decides to carry any valuables in their checked-in baggage against the above advice; they will do this at their own risk and shall not hold Spiceiet responsible for any pilferage I damage /etc. to such valuables. They shall lay no claim against SpiceJet and its employees, agents, successors etc in this regard. • The Company is not liable for any loss or damage occasioned by delay in the carriage by air of passengers or baggage. Receipt without complaint of registered baggage on the termination of the journey shall be prima fade evidence that the baggage has been delivered correctly and in good condition. • The Carrier's liability for loss or damage to baggage is limited to Rs 200 per kg with a maximum of Rs 3000/- only. The Carrier assumes no liability for fragile or perishable articles. From the above said terms and conditions, it is amply clear that as per the above said terms and conditions, which is a contract between the parties, the opposite party was not liable for any wear and tear or damage in the baggage. It is mentioned in the terms of carriage that the opposite party would not be liable for (scratches, torn zippers, straps, wheels, handles, scuffs, dents, soiling or manufacturer defects). It is submitted that the terms of carriage as well as the stipulations contained in Carriage by Air Act makes it specifically clear that the liability of the airline in case of loss/damage to baggage is Rs.200/- per Kg. It is also one of the stipulations contained in terms of carriage that receipt without complaint of registered baggage on the termination of the journey shall be prima facie evidence that the baggage had been delivered correctly and in good condition. The allegations of the complainant are that his luggage was damaged when he received the same at New Delhi Airport. It is submitted that at no point of time, the complainant lodged any BIR (Baggage Irregularity Report) at the airport. It is submitted that as per terms of carriage, as mentioned above, in the event of receipt of baggage, without any complaint, of any nature, whatsoever, it will be presumed that the passenger has received the baggage correctly and in good condition. It is submitted that the conduct of the complainant in not lodging any BIR or not pointing out the alleged damage to staff of the opposite party at the airport itself, belies the version of the complainant that there was any damage to the luggage of the complainant. It is submitted that in catena of judgments passed by the Honible National Commission, including, but not limited to "Spicejet Ltd. Vs. Himadri Sharma" and "Spicejet Ltd. Vs. Rajender Kaur", it has been clearly held by the Hon'ble National Commission that the terms of carriage of the airlines are binding contract between the parties and the parties are bound by the same. In view of the aforesaid, the present complaint filed on behalf of the complainant is without any merits, cause of action and substance and is liable to be dismissed with heavy costs. It has been pleaded that without prejudice to the contentions of the opposite party that no liability can be fastened upon the opposite party for the alleged loss suffered by the complainant, moreover the complainant submitted no proof, whatsoever, has been furnished or filed by the complainant at the time of the travel or thereafter along with the complaint substantiating his allegations regarding carrying of the alleged baggage by him in condition or further that when he received the said luggage, the same was in damage condition and in absence of the same, no compensation, whatsoever, can be awarded to the complainant. It is further submitted that this allegation of the complainant is not only false and misconceived, but is after thought also. It is submitted that for the first time, the complainant wrote an E-mail dated 26.07-2019 to the opposite party (date of journey was 11.07.2019) i.e. after about 15 days from the date of journey. It is submitted that it is highly unimaginable and improbable that a passenger would receive/accept its luggage from the airport in a damaged Condition and would not even lodge a complaint in respect of the same. The allegation of the complainant that one of the employees of the opposite party advised him to lodge the complaint online can not be accepted in as much as upon investigation by the opposite party, after it received complaint of the complainant on 26.07.2019, it was found that no such incident had happened on 11.07.2019 at Delhi Airport. There was no oral or written complaint of any baggage pilferage or damage. The complainant has filed the present complaint with ulterior motives and malafide intentions to extract unjustified and illegal money from the opposite party and as such, the present complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with heavy costs. For the aforesaid reasons only, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed with heavy costs. It has been further pleaded thatt without prejudice to the contentions of the Respondent that no liability can be fastened upon the Respondent for the alleged loss suffered by the complainant, it is submitted that the complainant has claimed exorbitant and excessive compensation through the present complaint, whereas, the present complaint does not disclose any cause of action, of any nature, whatsoever. The claimant has claimed a sum of Rs. 1.00 Lacs by way of the present complaint, which is highly exorbitant and does not even remotely relate to the alleged damage caused to the baggage of the complainant which reveals that the complaint is vague and evasive. The complainant has no where stated that as to what was the exact damage to the baggage or what was the material inside the baggage or what material been damaged and what was the worth of the said material. In view of the same, filing of this complaint by the complainant amounts to gross misuse of the process of law. Under these facts and circumstances, it is a fit case, wherein, this Hon'ble Court can invoke provisions contained in Section 26 of the Consumer Protectin Act and dismiss the present complaint with heavy costs. It has been also pleaded that the present complaint filed by and on behalf of the complainant is not maintainable in as much as all the alleged damages sought were never within the contemplation of the parties, at the time of booking of ticket or journey. The complaint and the compensation sought is bad for remoteness of damages the damages sought are so remote that the parties could not have contemplated the same at the time of issuance of the tickets. Moreover, the terms of the carriage, which are binding upon the parties contain provisions, by virtue of which, the present complaint is not maintainable. The said legal position has been upheld by the Hon'ble National Commission as well as Hon'ble Supreme court in various judgments, as mentioned above. The present complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs. The present complaint filed by the complainant before this Hon'ble Forum is not maintainable in as much as this Hon'ble Forum does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present Petition. It is submitted that no cause of action or even a part of cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Honible Courts It is submitted that mere booking of a ticket and that too by using a credit card would not confer and jurisdiction to this Hon'ble Forum to entertain and try the present complaint. On merits, opposite party has reiterated its version as pleaded in legal objections and detailed above. In the end, the opposite party No. 1 prayed for dismissal of complaint. In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 16.12.2019 (Ex. C-1) and documents (Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-12). In order to rebut the evidence of complainant, the opposite party has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Shashi Shekhar, Executive dated 12.2.2020 (Ex. OP-2/1) and closer the evidence. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the file carefully. Admittedly, the complainant had travelled with opposite party and had lodged the complaint regarding damages to his bag. However, this Commission has gone through the entire file but the complainant has not given any list/invoice of any damaged articles which are being claimed to have been damaged by opposite party and were lying in the bag. However, photographs, (Ex.C3) show that there is some damages to the bag of the complainant. However, again the complainant has not attached any bill/invoice of said bag to justify his claim that the said bag was very costly. However, opposite party has admitted its liability and offered future vouchers of just Rs.500/- to the complainant meaning thereby that opposite party has admitted that there was damages to the bag of the complainant. Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed as admitted by opposite party. Opposite party is directed to pay Rs.3000/- to the complainant as damages to the luggage of the complainant with interest @ 9% on Rs.3000/- w.e.f. 11.7.2019 till realization of entire amount and cost of Rs.2000/-. The compliance of this order be made by opposite party No.1 within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room. Announced:- 01-06-2023 (Lalit Mohan Dogra) President (Shivdev Singh) Member
| |
