Order-18.
Date-28/03/2016.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that she travelled to Kathmandu from Kolkata by Air India Flight AI-247 on 17-01-2015 and the ticket no is ETK – 0985853770169 CI boarding No.89 from Dum Dum Airport and on arrival at the Air Port in Kathmandu, complainant could not find her suitcase (Tag No.A1171987) containing woolen clothing, formal and informal dresses, toiletries, cash, debit card etc. So, complainant frantically searched for her suitcase running about in Kathmandu Airport but the suitcase could not be traced out. Then complainant contacted the officials of Tribhuvan Narayan Airport, Kathmandu to help her to find out the suitcase but no result. Officials could not even say whether the complainant’s baggage had reached the Airport in Kathmandu.
But an official of Air India namely Mr. Debasish Dey, Manager CC (C-Adm.) seeing the plight of the complainant asked her the reason and the complainant told him that she had come to Kathmandu from Kolkata by Air India Flighyt and her suitcase was missing. Mr. Debasish Dey issued a .Property Irregularity Report. to the complainant. Thereafter complainant reached at her hotel at about 6.15 p.m. and the shops were closed as it was Saturday and the complainant had to purchase just a set of clothes from Sports Plaza & Sherpa Mall, Darbar Marg, Kathmandu fro NPR 14265/- on 17-01-2015 and complainant had to leave for Bhairahawa (Nepal) by Buddha Air Flight No.851 without her baggage on 18-01-2015.
Later on the complainant came to know that her baggage was sent to Delhi instead of Kathmandu and was traced out by the Air Lines, thereafter, the complainant’s baggage was sent to Kathmandu and it was collected by a person on behalf of the complainant on 19-01-2015 from the Air India Office in Kathmandu and after returning to Kolkata from Kathmandu, complainant lodged a complaint with Air India vide e-mail dated 28-01-2015 and complainant claimed the sum of NPR 14265/- equivalent to INR 9183-18 being the price of the set of clothes and Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and harassment.
OP vide their e-mail dated 13-02-2015 intimated that the competent authority of Air India has approved Rs.3,000/- as interim relief though the OPs admitted the inconvenience caused to the complainant due to delayed delivery of baggage and apologized for the same.
Complainant replied against the OPs’ e-mail dated 16-02-2015 where complainant refused to accept the interim relief because she had to purchase just a set of clothes worth NPR 14265/- due to loss of baggage which is gross deficiency on the part of the Air India and praying it as full and final amount but they refused to pay it.
In the above circumstances, for mental pain, agony, sufferings and for negligence and deficient manner of service complainant filed this complaint for redressal.
On the other hand OP by filing written statement submitted that the complainant travelled from Kolkata to Kathmandu by AI-247 on 17-01-2015 against ticket no.098-5853770169 and she had one piece checked in baggage under tag no.AI 171987.
On 17-01-2015 complainant reported non-receipt of her registered baggage.and complainant further travelled from Kathmandu to Bhairahawa by Budda Air flight No.851 on 18-01-2015 and it appeared from record that the checked in baggage of the complainant went to Delhi from Kolkata which was received from Delhi on 18-01-2015 by the morning flight and same was collected by her representative in the late evening on 18-01-2015 at Kathmandu and in fact, there is no negligence and deficiency on the part of the OP but delay was caused for some error and for which they offer as per Rule Rs.3,000/- but complainant refused to receive it and filed this complaint to grab more money but no deficiency or negligence on the part of the OP is proved.
Decision with Reasons
On an indepth study of the complaint and the written version and further considering the general condition of carriage and passengers and package of Air India Ltd. it is found that limits of compensation is fixed in Article 17 and as per Article 17 it is clear that it is the liability of the passenger at the time of handing over the baggage or packages to carrier (Airlines) a special declaration of interest in delivery at destination and also the list of materials and its value at the time of delivery of the baggage and packages to the carrier (Airlines) and there must be a declaration about the value of the valuable goods inside the baggage and in that case if it is lost, the carrier shall have to pay a sum not exceeding the declared sum but in this case no doubt no loss was caused but in fact, bag was handed over just within 24 hours but in this case complainant as passenger did not declare any declaration at the time of handing over the bag that inside the package there is an item having its market value such and such when that was not there then there is no scope on the part of the OP to pay any amount for purchasing any goods by the complainant for such delay.
No doubt it is proved that complainant received the baggage on 18-01-2015 at late evening as per receipt but it should be handed over on the night of 17-01-2015, so, 24 hours delay is there but it is not for the laches and negligence on the part of the OP.
Another factor is that there was no allegation at the time of receiving the said baggage at Kathmandu Airport. So, it is clear that complainant received the baggage just 24 hours from the time of receiving the same and no doubt it was delivered intact condition and when that is the fact for that delay as per Clause, one time interim compensation of GBP 50.00 or equivalent in local currency may be reimbursed and in India, the amount is INR 3,000 and as per said Clause the carriers shall not be liable beyond this limit when it is proved that such a delay was caused not for wrongful act on the part of the OP.
Another factor is that in this case complainant has failed to prove any sort of negligence and deficiency on the part of the OP and it is a settled principle of law that if there is any error and for that error if any damage is caused, in that case passenger is not entitled to any further compensation except as per provision of the general condition of carriage and passengers and package of Air India Ltd. Complainant is entitled to interim compensation of Rs.3,000/- and truth is that OP offered it but complainant did not accept it. As per provision of C.P. Act deficiency in service in respect of the delay for delivery of the articles by the Carrier Airlines Authority cannot ordinarily be attributed to negligence on the part of the Airlines but for delay if complainant proves the deficiency of service, in that case negligence must be proved. But in the present case complainant no doubt has failed to prove any negligence on the part of the OP but for any error it was sent to Delhi and for which OP took immediate steps and carried away to Kathmandu on the morning by 18th January, 2015 but complainant was out of station for which her agent on her behalf received it at late evening of 18th but not on 19th when that is the fact then invariably for such delay OP offered Rs.3,000/- but complainant did not receive it. Thereafter, on return from Kathmandu they prayed for a huge amount.
In this context it is to be mentioned that in the present case it is found that complainant is well aware of the fact that at the time of handing over the baggage it was her duty to declare the valuation of the entire articles what the bag contains.
Peculiar factor is that one pair of wearing he purchased at a cost of NPR 14265/- but it is absurd. If complainant wants to get compensation of NPR 14265/- equivalent to INR 9183-18 in that case she must have to submit her declaration to the carrier at the time of handing over the bag that in that bag such and such articles were there and each and every item’s valuation, declaration must be there but that was not there.
Nowadays it is to become a practice of the consumer to be casual at the time of handing over bag to the Carrier Airliners but when it is found that something is lost or delay is caused then it is found that for want of that they purchase very valuable articles for their wearing. Only the consumer knows how long such sort of path shall be taken for getting relief from the Forum as Airline Passenger without giving any declaration about the valuation of the article what contained in the bag. There is no such paper produced by the complainant that in that bag she had her such valuable wearing costing about Rs.15,000/-
Relying upon all the above discussions and materials and also considering no negligence and deficiency on the part of the OP we are allowing only Rs.3,000/- as compensation which already offered by the OP for such delay which was not caused due to negligence, deficiency on the part of the OP but it is a mere error. It is settled principle of law Err is Human but due to error of an employee if it is found one has suffered severe damages in that case some compensation may be awarded but negligence and deficiency must be proved but in this case negligence and deficiency on the part of the OP is not proved. Error is detected for that forthwith OP apologized to the complainant and offered the highest benefit that is Rs.3,000/- as compensation for such delay but it is not a case for damage caused by the Airlines and truth is that complainant did not suffer any damage within that 24 hours delay. Practically complainant appeared before this Forum prayed for compensation of Rs.9,183-18 and such sort of claim should be turned down in view of the fact that claim itself is found exorbitant but honest approach of the complainant is nowhere which is proved from the story as made it in the complaint.
Last but not least we want to say for what reason at the time of receiving the said item complainant did not file such complaint claiming that in the bag such and such article valued at INR 9,183-18 was there and for non availability of the same forthwith he purchased wearing about NPR 15,000 but at that time complainant was silent but ground was prepared after arrival at Kolkata and truth is that she received the same on 18-01-2015 whereas complaint was lodged to the OP on 28-01-2015. A story writer cannot believe that to write such a story for the purpose of writing complaint she took 10 days time because materials were not in her hand so she collected materials how to fight such case to make it believable but complainant’s own complaint is neither believable not reliable in view of the fact that everything is imaginary. The complainant had her no grievances at the very outset when she received the article on 18-01-2015 but at that time she ought to have stated such fact what has been ventilated in the complaint that means everything is afterthought.
Whatever it may be the principle of law as laid down in the C.P. Act regarding deficiency, negligence is not at all ventilated and no negligence and deficiency is also proved. So, complainant is entitled to Rs.3,000/- as relief granted by the OP already and for error before this Forum to contest the case a sum of Rs.1,000/- is allowed as cost.
In the result, complaint succeeds in part.
Hence,
Ordered
That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OPs with a cost of Rs.1,000/-.
OPs shall have to pay Rs.3,000/- as compensation as per general condition of carriage and passengers and package of Air India Ltd. Rules along with cost of Rs.1,000/- within one month from the date of this order in favour of the complainant and failing which penal action u/s.25 read with Section 27 of the C.P. Act shall be started against them for which penalty and fine shall be imposed.
