DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM Civil Station, Palakkad – 678001, Kerala
Dated this the 6th day of July, 2010
Present: Smt.Seena.H, President Smt.Preetha.G.Nair, Member Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K, Member
CC.No.84/2009
A.K.Shahabudheen, S/o.P.A.Ahamed Kabeer, 271/C, Kakkayur Road, Pitupeedika, Koduvayoor, Palakkad. - Complainant (By Adv.K.K.Jaideep) Vs
1. The Manager, Srilankan Airlines, Coimbatore Civil Airport, Coimbatore.
2. Srilankan Airlines Limited, Head Office, Vijaya Tower, No.4, Kodambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600034. (By Adv.Ajaykumar for opposite parties 1 & 2)
3. The Manager, Akbar Travels of India Private Limited, Anugraha Shopping Complex, Sulthanpet, Palakkad. - Opposite parties (By Adv.Jayachandran.G) O R D E R
By Smt.Seena.H, President
Complainant's case in brief is that he booked ticket for traveling from Coimbatore to Male Deep by flight in Sri Lankan Airlines from 3rd opposite party. Date of journey was 11/02/2008. Complainant entrusted a baggage weighing 9 kg containing his personal effects, cash, gift items etc to the Sri Lankan Airlines authorities at Coimbatore at the time of boarding who inturn issued proper receipt. On arrival at Male Deep Airport when the complainant approached the baggage section, it was told by the authorities that the baggage
is missing. The authorities issued a memo to that effect. He was made to stay at the transit room at Male. 65 dollars was charged for food & accommodation. Since the baggage was missing the complainant was not in a position to carryout his business plans for which he had come to Male. On 12/02/2008 he was deported to Colombo at about 9 a.m (Male time). Complainant was made to wait and suffer in Colombo till 14/02/2008. He was not in a position to change his dress as everything was left in the baggage and he had hardly left with any cash to buy a new pair of dress. During his stay at Colombo airport, he was subjected to untold mental torture by local authorities ordering him to vacate the airport premises saying that he should either leave for India by next flight or get out of the airport accepting a temporary visa for 2 days as the scheduled flight was on 14/02/2008. He was made to wait outside the airport for two days. On 14/02/2008, he was sent to Coimbatore by Sri Lankan Airlines flight and on his arrival at Coimbatore, he lodged a complaint with the airline authorities for missing baggage for which they had issued a receipt. Complainant issued a lawyer notice to 1st opposite party on 16/02/2008 requesting them to return the baggage along with a compensation of Rs.1 lakh. On 29/02/2008, 1st opposite party sent reply stating that they had initiated an investigation regarding lost baggage. Only on 01/03/2008 he could retrieve the lost baggage at Coimbatore Airport. The suffering which the complainant had to undergo for 3 days due to the lapse on the part of opposite parties was beyond description. The act of 1st and 2nd opposite parties clearly amounts to deficiency in service and hence the complaint.
2. Opposite parties entered appearance. 3rd opposite party has not filed any version. 1st and 2nd opposite parties filed version contending the following. 1st and 2nd opposite parties admit that complainant has traveled in Sri Lankan Airlines on 11/02/2008 and they have checked in one bag of complainant weighing 9 kg from Coimbatore. It is submitted by opposite parties that on arrival to Male, passenger was denied entry by local authorities as
the passenger was not in possession of a work permit/or insufficient funds. Complainant was deported to Coimbatore from Colombo on 14/02/2008 as it was only the next connecting flight from Colombo to Coimbatore. On enquiry bag in question was located in Colombo and the same was handed over to the complainant from Coimbatore on 01/03/2008.
3. 1st and 2nd opposite parties further submit that the complainant is not supposed to keep money in the checked in baggage and it is against Article 8.3.4 of Sri Lankan Airlines conditions of carriage for passenger and baggage. Further in case of delay, the complaint must be made within 21 days from the date on which the baggage has been placed at his disposal under Article 27(4). Failing complaint within the time aforesaid, no action shall lie against the carrier service save in the case of fraud on his part under Article 27(4). Opposite party contented that no separate notice in writing was served on opposite parties as per Article 24(3). Opposite parties submit that they are not liable to pay compensation as prayed for. The limited liability of the opposite parties is US$20 per kilo.
4. The evidence adduced on the part of the complainant consists of the proof affidavit and Exts.A1 to A7 documents. None of the opposite parties has filed any affidavit. No documentary evidence on the part of opposite parties. Complainant was examined as PW1.
5. Now the issues for consideration are; a) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties? b) If so, what the relief and cost complainant is entitled to?
6. Issues a & b: In this case, there is no dispute as to the fact that the complainant has traveled by flight of the opposite parties from Coimbatore to Male Deep on 11/02/2008. It is also not in
dispute that the opposite parties could not deliver the baggage of complainant on boarding at Male Deep. There is also no dispute on the point that the opposite parties has handed over the baggage to complainant only on 01/03/2008.
7. We have gone through the entire evidence on record. From the admitted facts of the opposite parties itself, the deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties is crystal clear. We do not find any substance in the argument of the learned counsel for opposite parties that complaint was not made within the statutory period of 21 days. Complainant has specifically stated in the affidavit that complaint has been made on 14/02/2008 on arrival at Coimbatore. Hence it is within the statutory period.
8. Opposite parties has submitted that their liability is limited to US$20 per kilo. Hence complainant is entitled to US$180 since the baggage weights 9 kg (US$20 X 9).
9.Complainant has deposed when cross examined that all his personal belonging was in the baggage. Since the dress materials and other necessary items are in the baggage, certainly complainant would have suffered a lot. The agony will be more when it happened in a foreign country. Hence complainant is entitled to a certain sum as compensation.
10. For the reasons stated above, we allow the complaint. 1st and 2nd opposite parties is jointly and severally directed to pay Indian money equal to US$180 together with Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and sufferings and Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceedings. Order to be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order failing which the whole amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% from the date of order till realisation. Complainant claims no relief against 3rd opposite party and hence 3rd opposite party is exonerated from liability.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 6th day of July, 2010 Sd/- Seena.H, President Sd/- Preetha.G.Nair, Member Sd/- Bhanumathi.A.K, Member Appendix Date of filing: 27/06/2009 Witnesses examined on the side of complainant PW1 – Shri.A.K.Shahabudheen Witnesses examined on the side of opposite parties Nil Exhibits marked on the side of complainant Ext.A1 – Photocopy of Passport of complainant Ext.A2 – Photocopy of electronic ticket Ext.A3 – Photocopy of Deportee passenger report Ext.A4 – Photocopy of property irregularity report Ext.A5 (Series) – Copy of lawyer notice, acknowledgement card, postal receipts etc Ext.A6 – Reply dt.29/02/2008 sent by opposite party Ext.A7 – Letter dt.04/03/2008 sent by opposite party Exhibits marked on the side of opposite parties Nil Cost(Allowed) Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only)
| | [HONORABLE Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K] Member[HONORABLE Smt.Seena.H] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE Smt.Preetha.G.Nair] Member | | 
