JUDGMENT Per Justice Sham Sunder , President This appeal, for return of the airbag and for enhancement of the compensation, has been filed by the appellant/complainant against the order dated 4.3.2010, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T. Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred as the District Forum only),vide which it awarded a sum of Rs.3000/- as compensation on account of loss of the baggage of the complainant and directed the OPs to pay the same within 30 days from the receipt of a copy of the order, failing which, they were directed to pay the amount with interest @ 12% p.a., from the date of filing the complaint i.e. 12.8.2009 till the date of realization. 2. The complainant, alongwith his family members, boarded the OPs Airlines Flight on 24.5.2009, vide booking Ann.C-2 (colly), from Delhi to Chandigarh and deposited all their baggage with them. However, when they reached Chandigarh Airport and went to collect their baggage at Baggage Belt of the OPs Airlines, one air bag weighing approx. 23 Kg. having Tracking Number vide Ann.C-3, was found missing/lost in transit. This fact was brought to the notice of OP No.2, who assured that it would be delivered to the complainant, at his residence, within 24 hours, but the same was not delivered. It was further stated that the marriage reception party of the complainant was to be held on 25.5.2009, and all the wedding dresses, jewellary items and other important documents contained in the said airbag, which was lost in transit. It was further stated that the complainant had to purchase the complete wedding dresses and jewellery items, afresh, for his reception party, by spending Rs.2.00 lacs approx. The complainant sent various e-mails to the OPs and even his father visited OP No.2, personally, for enquiry about the lost baggage, but to no avail. It was further stated that the OPs were deficient, in rendering service and also indulged into unfair trade practice. It was further stated that the complainant had to suffer a lot of mental agony and physical harassment, on account of the loss of the baggage. It was further stated that when the grievance of the complainant was not redressed, left with no other alternative, a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act only) was filed by the complainant. 3. The OPs, put in appearance, and filed a joint reply, wherein, it was admitted that the complainant boarded their flight from New Delhi to Chandigarh. It was stated that the weight of the lost bag was not more than 15 Kg. as the complainant did not pay for excess baggage, because as per the Schedule of Charges, the checked baggage allowance was 15 Kg. per person and excess baggage was to be charged @Rs.70/- per Kg, whereas the cabin baggage allowance was 7 Kg. per person. It was further stated that the complainant never disclosed the contents of the lost baggage. It was further stated that the OPs tried their level best to track down the baggage, at their end, but it was not found. It was further stated that even, otherwise, in the event of baggage loss, as per the Carriage by Air Act, 1972, the complainant was entitled to a sum of Rs.200/- per Kg. only, subject to maximum of 15Kg. All other averments made, in the complaint, were denied. 4. The parties led evidence, in support of their case. 5. After hearing the Counsel for the parties, and, on going through the evidence and record of the case, the District Forum, accepted the complaint, in the manner, referred to, in the opening para of the judgment. 6. Feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal, was filed by the appellant/complainant, for return of the airbag, as also for enhancement of the compensation. 7. We have heard the Counsel for the parties, and have gone through the evidence and record of the case ,carefully. 8. The Counsel for the appellant, at the very outset, submitted that the District Forum did not take into consideration, as to the extent mental agony and physical harassment, suffered by the complainant, on account of the loss of airbag, which contained valuable articles, as also wedding dresses and jewellary for his wedding reception on 25.5.2009. He further submitted that the District Forum was also wrong, in holding that the complainant was entitled to compensation @ Rs.200/- per Kg. subject to maximum of 15Kg. He further submitted that the provisions of the Carriage by Air Act,1972, were amended from time to time. He further submitted that according to the Regulations of Go Airlines (India) Pvt. Ltd. , in which the complainant travelled, the customers are to check-in upto 25 Kgs of luggage on GoSmart & GoFlexi bookings. He further submitted that it was the duty of the airlines, to trace the lost baggage of the complainant and to handover the same, to him. He further submitted that the complainant was also entitled to the compensation, for the financial loss and mental harassment to the extent of Rs.5 lacs. He further submitted that the order of the District Forum, to this extent, is liable to be modified. 9. On the other hand, the Counsel for the respondents, submitted that as per Carriage by Air Act,1972, the airlines in which the complainant travelled only allowed check-in baggage to the extent of 15Kg per customer. He further submitted that the complainant never disclosed the articles, contained in the baggage, and, as such, was not entitled to any compensation or loss thereof. He further submitted that the District Forum was right, in holding, that the complainant concocted a story that the baggage was carrying valuable articles. He further submitted that the District Forum, was, thus, right in awarding a sum of Rs.3000/- @ Rs.200/- per Kg. for the baggage weighing 15 Kg., as per the aforesaid Act. He further submitted that the order of the District Forum , being legal and valid, is not liable to be set aside. 10. After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the rival contentions, raised by the Counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion, that the appeal deserves to be accepted partly, for the reasons, to be recorded hereinafter. Admittedly, the complainant travelled in the airlines of the OPs from New Delhi to Chandigarh. According to the complainant, the baggage which was checked-in, with the airlines, at the time of boarding the flight, was weighing about 23 Kg. R-1, is a document which was relied upon by the OPs. It is based on Carriage by Air Act,1972. No doubt, in this document, it is mentioned that check-in baggage was allowed upto 15Kg. per customer and excess baggage was to be charged @ Rs.70 per Kg. At the time of arguments, the Counsel for the Appellant, relied upon the latest Regulations marked as AX relating to the conditions of non-international carriage of Customers and Baggage framed pursuant to the Carriage by Air Act,1972 and the Notification regarding application to carriage which was non-international. According to this document, GoAir allows its customers to check-in upto 25kgs of luggage on GoSmart & GoFlexi bookings and 35kgs on GoBusiness. These are the latest Regulations of the OPs. It means that the baggage upto 25kgs, could be checked-in, while travelling in the OP airlines. There is no reason, to disbelieve the version of the complainant, as the same is duly supported by an affidavit, that the baggage weighed 23kgs, and not 15kgs. Since, the baggage was lost and could not be traced, the question of return of the same, to the complainant, did not arise at all. The complainant shall be entitled to compensation in respect of 23kg weight of the baggage @ Rs.200/- per kg. i.e. Rs.4600/- , instead of Rs.3000/-, awarded by the District Forum. There is no provision, in the aforesaid Regulation, regarding the award of the compensation, over and above the amount @ 200/- per kg. for the weight of the baggage. The complainant, was, thus, not entitled to any enhanced compensation, as claimed by him. The order of the District Forum, thus, is modified to the extent, referred to above. 11. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal is partly accepted with no order as to costs. The order of the District Forum is modified in the manner, that the OPs shall pay a sum of Rs.4600/- (i.e. 23X200), instead of Rs.3000/-, awarded by the District Forum. The amount of Rs.1600/- over and above the one awarded by the District Forum, shall be paid within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, failing which, the OPs shall be liable to pay the entire amount of Rs.4600/- with interest @ 12% P.A. from the date of filing the complaint till realization of the same. 12. Certified Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge. The file be consigned to record room.
| | HON'BLE MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER | HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER, PRESIDENT | , | |
