The complainant’s case is as follows: The complainant travelled from Muscat to Cochin in the Oman Air Flight No. WY 0827 on 31.1.07. The ticket was issued by the respondent company at Ibri, Sultanate of Oman. When he arrived at Kochi Airport, the luggage of the complainant is seen to be missed due to the negligence of the respondents. The complainant approached the first respondent and enquired about the luggage. Then they checked the boarding pass and luggage list and asked to wait for sometime. After 3 hours the first and second respondents told to the complainant that the luggage of the complainant was missed and it was loaded to another flight and asked to come after two days. The respondents gave an acknowledge receipt of  Property Irregularity Report. Then the complainant returned to his residence bare handed and caused to pay the fare of the taxi and goods pick-up vehicle, which was arranged by the family members to receive the complainant due to the luggage . After two days the complainant enquired about the luggage at Kochi Airport. Then the respondents not only failed to give satisfactory explanation but also misbehaved and intimated that the missing was due to the carelessness of the complainant and asked to come after two weeks. After two weeks also no fruitful reply and no remedy. Hence the complaint.

 

            2. Version filed by the first and second respondent is that the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant has no manner of any right to invoke the territorial jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Forum so as to file the complaint as no part of cause of action or any place or event as mentioned in Rule 29(1) of II schedule to the Carriage By air Act, 1972, falls within or occurred in any place within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Forum. The averments that baggages were missed due to the negligence of the respondents are absolutely incorrect and hence denied. The allegation that his baggages were loaded to another flight and asked to come after two days are only falsehood. The PIR was raised only as courtesy. The free baggage allowance permissible was only 20kg. and hence the allegations are incorrect and fully exaggerated and hence baseless and denied. Hence dismiss the complaint.

 

            3. The issue of maintainability is raised by the respondents and heard. 

 

            4. The petitioner travelled from Muscat to Cochin and the ticket was issued by the respondent company at Ibri, Sultanate of Oman. When the complainant arrived at Kochi Airport, it was seen that his luggage was missed and the complaint is filed to realize cost of the missed luggage. So cause of action arose at Kochi Airport. The first and second respondents are also at Ernakulam District. No cause of action took place within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. In this case the Oman Air is not having any branch or establishment in Thrissur, nor having any principal place of business. The destination of the flight also not in Thrissur. Hence the case is not maintainable in this Forum and the complainant can approach the proper Forum. Hence complaint is dismissed.

 

 

 

 

             Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum this the 3rd day of December 2008.