BINOY BHUSHAN CHOUDHURY vs INDIAN AIRLINES

THIS complaint petition has been filed by a Government employee serving as Superintending Engineer, A.S.E.B. The case in brief, is that the complainant was a passenger of Flight No. IC-229 from Calcutta to Guwahati on 11.9.90. At Calcutta Airport he handed over a suit case ''VIP'' brand weighing approximately 20 Kgs. to the opposite party for carrying it to Guwahati, and accordingly the opposite party acknowledged the same by its Tag No. 940952. However on arrival at Guwahati Airport, inspite of his demand, the opposite party failed to deliver the said suit case but instead issued a baggage discrepancy report No. GAU/APT/4-1/0034 dated 11.9.90 to the complainant in token of loss of the suit case (Annexure-A to the complaint petition). That thereafter inspite of repeated demands the opposite party failed to deliver the baggage which led the complainant to lodge his claim in respect of the loss of the suit case as well as its contents amounting to Rs. 46,491.00 on 4.10.90 (Annexure-B to the complaint petition). Thereafter the opposite party by letter dated 13/14.11.90 (Annexure-C to the complaint petition) intimated the complainant that they are trying to locate the baggage in question and asked the complainant to return the baggage discrepancy report, jacket of air tickets and the counter foil of baggage identification tag, all in original. However, the complainant did not return any of the original documents for fear of some foul play that may be practised with by the opposite parties to refute the claim. That inspite of serving a legal notice dated 26.3.91 on the opposite parties for settlement of the claim, and after approaching the opposite party on many occasions, the opposite party deferred the settlement on one pretext or the other and hence the complaint dated 15.9.92 before this Commission for a total claim of Rs. 1,36,833.00 including claim as per claim bill with interest thereon and compensation on account of mental agony and harassment.

THE opposite party in its written statement contends that the present case is not a consumer dispute in terms of the provisions of Consumer Protection Act 1986, and, in any case, the liability of the Corporation shall be limited to a sum of Rs. 160.00 per Kilogram for registered baggage in the event of the luggage being lost during transit as per provisions of the Indian Airlines Non-International Carriage (Passengers and Baggage) Regulation 1980, (henceforth to be referred as the Regulation). THE opposite party denies the allegations in the complaint in general terms, and states that the petitioner''s non-compliance with the request of the opposite party for furnishing the baggage discrepancy report, the jacket of the air tickets, and baggage identification tag counter foil in original has prevented the opposite party to proceed further in the case. THE opposite party disputes the claims of the petitioner except that what is allowed under the provisions of the Regulation. We have heard the Counsels of both the parties. We have no hesitation in rejecting Outright the contention of the opposite party that the present case is not a consumer dispute. The complainant is admittedly a passenger of the Flight in question who has hired the service of the opposite party for consideration with the purchase of the air tickets. The complainant is undoubtedly a consumer in terms of Section 2(d)(ii), and the carriage of passenger and goods by air offered by the opposite party is surely a service of transport in terms of Section 2(o) of the Consumer Protection Act.

Now the question remains to be considered is whether the complainant is entitled to any reliefs and compensation in the case. The baggage discrepancy report, the jacket of the air tickets, and baggage identification tag are their own documents issued by the opposite party. As per Annexure-B of the complaint it appears that the complainant has sent back to the opposite party the photocopy of the aforesaid documents. The baggage discrepancy report is dated 11.9.90 which is the date of the Flight in question. The opposite party cannot now resile from their own document & and being in such in-escapable position, they have in their written statement stated that the "opposite parties were always and are still ready and willing to settle the claim if any of the complainant..." As per the baggage discrepancy report the weight of the luggage is 20 Kgs. and as the opposite party has failed to return back the same, the complainant is entitled to the payment of Rs. 160.00 per Kg. which comes to a total amount of Rs. 3,200/- for the loss sustained by him.

AS for the loss of materials inside the suit-case the complainant has asked for an amount of Rs. 46,491.00. We are afraid that this claim cannot be entirely conceded to as the complainant has not put in a declaration of interest and paid a supplimentary sum at the time of handing over the suit-case to the carrier in terms of the provisions of Clause 22(2)(a) of the Second Schedule of the Carriage by Air Act 1972. In the baggage discrepancy report the contents have been described to consist of "personnel effects" only. Nevertheless the complainant at a later stage has given a list of materials which fall under the category of personal effects, and the opposite party has not totally denied the same. Had the complainant attempted to explain the contents in the baggage discrepancy report when the same was being prepared, the matter would have received more meritorious consideration in our hands. But it cannot also be said that the suit case weighing 20 Kgs. was devoid of some contents, but what materials were inside the suit case, and what was their exact value cannot be ascertained in absolute terms for lack of declaration by the complainant at the time of preparation of the baggage discrepancy report. However, the complainant at that stage spoke of personnel effects inside the suit-case, and it is very difficult to dispute that the complainant who was a traveller did not have some belongings in the suit case. The function of the Indian Airlines Corporation is to provide safe, adequate, economical and properly co-ordinated air service. The opposite party has not been able to locate the baggage till now inspite of the fact that notice of the opposite party was immediately drawn to the missing baggage through the baggage discrepancy report. The facts of the case established that the suit case with some contents have been lost while it was in the custody of the opposite party and the opposite party has not been able to disprove the loss. In our opinion, in terms of the Contractual Agreement entered into by the parties, the action of the opposite party in not safely keeping the baggage and delivering the same to the complainant constituted deficiency on the part of the opposite party in providing Air Transport Service. The complainant is therefore entitled to some relief in this respect also. In such circumstances the hands of the Redressal Commissions are not bound tight in view of Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act. We are therefore of the opinion that an amount of Rs. 2,000/- as taken compen-'' satory loss is payable to the complainant over and above the amount of Rs. 3,200/- which will meet the ends of justice in the present case. We are also of the opinion that the complainant has suffered hardship and harassment over a long period of time in approaching the opposite party on several occasions consuming much of his time and energy, and as such we allow a sum of Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant as compensation for mental agony and harassment suffered by him. We therefore, direct the opposite party to pay a total amount of Rs. 6,200/- as described in details above to the complainant within a period of two months from the date of this order failing which the sum will accrue interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The opposite party is also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 500/- as costs to the complainant. With the above directions the petition is disposed of. Complaint allowed.