Complainant:

Sandeep Chadda
B-8 207 L&T South City
Bannerghatta Road
Close to Arekere Mico Layout
Bangalore- 560 076


/vs./



Opposite Party:


The Managing Director
Go Airlines (India) Ltd.,
Paper box house
Off Mahakali Cave Road
Andheri (East)
Mumbai-400 093

O R D E R



This is a complaint filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite party for the payment of Rs.3,17,664/- with interest. This cost includes 80% of the cost of lost items accruing to Rs 89,600, interest accrued for 6 months at the rate of 18% per annum equaling Rs 8064, Rs 20,000 in follow up charges with Go Air for the last 3 months, and Rs 2,00,000 in compensation for the harassment.

The brief facts of the case are that the complainant flew from Delhi to Bangalore on Dec 15th, 2010 along with his family, Mrs. Uma Chadda, mother of the complainant, and Mrs. Kirti Chadda, wife of the complainant via flight G-8 201 of the opposite Airlines. The PNR details of the 3 passengers are as follows:

Name of the passenger PNR Details
Sandeep Chadda A8UKDC
Uma Chadda FJMU3S
Kirti Gandhi DXI2U2

The complainant along with his family, on Dec 15th, 2010 checked in 3 bags at the counter of the Opposite Airlines at the Delhi Airport at around 9:00 am. The complainant along with family reached the Bangalore Airport at around 12:00 pm and found that 1 of their 3 bags, weighing approximately 20 kgs, was missing while another bag did not have the baggage tag on it. The luggage tags for the 2 bags in question are as follows:

Luggage Tags
00G8504326
00G8504332

The complainant informed the Counter of the Opposite Airlines at the Bangalore Airport of the loss of luggage and a PIR was issued to search for the lost luggage. The complainant provided the details of the lost luggage and its content to Mr. Abel who was available at the Opposite Airline Counter at Bangalore Airport. The details of the content are as follows:

Description of the lost luggage:
• Brown Samsonite Bag weighing approximately 20 kgs
• Trolley Bag with 2 wheels
• Image:

Description of luggage Contents:
• 1 new Park Avenue Grey from the complainant’s reception party
• 1 new Brown Blackberry Blazer – gifted for complainant’s marriage
• 1 new Titan Watch – gifted for complainant’s marriage
• 2 new Black and White Mufflers - gifted for complainant’s marriage
• 15+ shirts
• 4 Trousers
• 5 Jeans
• 4 Designer Shoes from US
• 1 Italian Floater
• 4 shorts from Australia and Malaysia
• 4 skiwis – Armani and Guess Brands
• Toiletries
• Original mark sheets, degree certificates, and license that belong to complainant’s wife
• Other sundry items
• Approximate cost of the lost luggage – INR 1,12,000

The complainant also informed Mr. Abel that the there was a strong suspicion that the luggage was stolen and not lost in the transit. The reason for my suspicion is as follows:
• The complainant and his wife are a newly married couple and it was evident to the ground staff
• When the 3 bags were checked in, the complainant saw the ground staff of the Opposite Airlines putting the luggage tags, miss the luggage tag on the brown Samsonite bag (bag in question that is lost) and put the bag on the conveyor belt. The grand staff person then shouted upon another grand staff of the Opposite Airlines at the other end of the conveyor belt and asked him to unload the luggage from the belt. At the moment the complainant thought that it was all part of the routine duty therefore did not intervene
• Upon arrival in Bangalore, the same Samsonite bag was reported lost.
• When the luggage was being checked in, the same Ground staff person of the Opposite Airlines did not put any luggage tag on one of the other checked-in luggage to create more confusion in identifying the baggage that is lost

In the due course of time, the complainant made in excess of 20 phone calls over a period of one week to obtain status of the lost luggage. The ground staff of the Opposite Airlines was never able to provide any conclusive report on the lost luggage. The conversation details of the phone calls with the ground staff of the Opposite Party are as follows:

16th December, 2010
• Time • Contact Person of the Opposite Airlines • Conversation Details
• 10:00am • Mr. Abel • Mr. Abel confirmed that the Bangalore authorities are not able to trace the bag
• 12:00pm • Mr. Tony • Mr. Tony confirmed that the Go Air Bangalore Airport authorities were not able to trace the bag in Delhi and Bangalore
• 3:00pm • Mr. Sudhir • Go Air will call the complainant at around 3:10pm
• 3:10 pm • -- • The complainant did not receive any calls
• 3:20 pm • Mr. Sudhir • Mr. Sudhir confirmed that the Bangalore Airport Authorities are not able to locate the bag in Delhi and Bangalore

17th December, 2010
• Time • Contact Person Contact Person of the Opposite Airlines • Conversation Details
• 10:00am • Ms Ranjana • The complainant will call in 1 hour
• 11:30am • Mr. Tony • The complainant insisted to call the manager "Dhanraj" on which Mr. Tony confirmed that Mr. Dhanraj will be calling back at 1:30
• 11:34 am • Go Air Customer Care • The complainant sent an email to feedback@goair.in explaining the entire case and asking for immediate assistance on the status of the luggage lost
• 2:30pm • Ms Ranjana • The complainant was informed that Mr. Shanraj was busy and the complainant insisted to talk to Mr. Dhanraj
• 4:00 pm • Head Office – 02267420300 • Contacted head office to escalate the case and they the head office advised to call the Customer Care Number
• Go Air • Customer care – 09223222111 • Contacted customer care and the customer care informed to talk to the Ground Staff at the Bangalore airport since they are the best personnel to assist

20th December, 2010
• Time • Contact Person • Conversation Details
• 10:20am • Ms Ranjana • Ms Ranjana informed that the baggage has been lost therefore the Head Office will call the complainant and compensate for the baggage cost
• She also informed that the complainant will receive a call by 10:50am from Mr. Dhanraj
• She also informed that an email will be sent to the complainant confirming the loss of luggage
• 10:50am • ----- • The complainant did not receive any calls from Mr. Dhanraj or any emails from Ms Ranjana
• 11:30 am • Mr. Tony • Mr. Tony informed that the case was handed over to the head office since the luggage is declared “lost”
• He confirmed that Mr. Dhanraj will call me by 1:00pm
• 01:00pm • Mr. Tony • Informed that Mr. Dhanraj is busy and will call at 3:00 pm
• 3:00 pm • ---- • The complainant did not receive any call from Mr. Dhanraj

21st December, 2010

• 2:10 pm • Ms Ayesha • Ms Ayesha conformed that she would call back by 4:30 pm regarding the lost luggage
• 4:30 pm • -------- • No calls received from the BLR Airport
• 4:50 pm • Mr. Tony • Mr. Tony confirmed that the case has been handed over to Head Office since the luggage has been confirmed lost


22nd December, 2010

• 2:10 pm • Ms Ayesha • The complainant called to check the status of the case and Ms Ayesha informed that she would call back by 4:30 pm regarding the lost luggage since there are some interesting findings that she would like to share
• She informed that the team is still searching for luggage

• 4:50 pm • Mr. Tony • When the complainant called again Mr. Tony re-iterated that the case has been handed over to Head Office. The luggage has been declared lost. Someone from the head office will contact me as soon as possible

23rd December, 2010

• 2:40 pm • Head office @ 022-67420300 • The receptionist at the opposite party’s office put the complainant on hold and later disconnected he call. This continued for 45 minutes
• 2:44 pm • BLR Airport • The phone keeps ringing nut no one picks up when the complainant called the Airport authorities again
• 2:51 pm • Customer Care – Rashid • The complainant called and talked to Mr. Rashid and briefed him on the case. Also informed that I have sent several reminders to feedback@goair.in but I do not get a response.
• Mr. Rashid confirmed that the complainant will get a response in one day else the case will be escalates to the next level manager.

After almost 5 reminders, the opposite party responded on Fri 12/24/2010 3:31 PM to the complainants email suggesting that the feedback team of the opposite party had received the email and will start working on it. After subsequent discussions, the opposite party responded on Tue 1/11/2011 7:37 PM confirming that Go Air’s liability for loss of baggage is limited to Rs.200/- per kg up to a maximum of Rs.4000/- whichever is lower thereby sharing a compensation of Rs 4000 with the complainant. The Complainant refused to accept this offer since it did not compensate for the loss accrued by the complainant.

On further negotiation, the opposite party agreed to compensate to the complainant a sum of Rs 4000 and 2 economy tickets on the Bangalore Delhi sector to which the complainant again declined since it did not compensate for the loss. The complainant submitted a written complaint to the opposite party explaining the entire situation on Feb 03, 2011. This complaint was received by the opposite party on Feb 03, 2011. The written complaint requested a compensation of Rs 89,600 and also informed the opposite party that the complainant will be forced to approach the consumer court if the opposite party failed to comply with the deadline of 15 days to respond to the complainant. The opposite party did not respond to any of the complainant’s requests therefore missing the requested deadline of 15 days on Feb 20th, 2011.

The loss of luggage itself was a huge shock for the complainant and his family since it not only amounted to a financial loss but also all the memories associated with his marriage were lost due to the opposite party’s negligence. The negligence and indifference of the opposite party added to the agony of the complainant and his family.

It is evident from the phone calls, emails, and written complaints that the Opposite Party did not call back to even a single phone call made by the complainant, the complainant had to make several reminders to obtain a single response on emails, and that the opposite party provided conflicting reports on the status of the baggage loss. The opposite party was completely indifferent towards the complainant raising concerns regarding the baggage being stolen as against being lost. The opposite party also failed to respond to any of the complainants’ requests in a timely fashion.

This sort of an act on the part of the opposite party definitely amounts to deficiency in their services. It is their bounden duty to refund the amount accrued by the complainant due to the loss of luggage and the mental agony that the complainant and his family were subjected to.