State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Air India Ltd. vs Madan Mohan Lal Das on 29 May, 2014
IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI (Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986) Date of Decision: 29.05.2013 First Appeal 971/2012 1. 2. Chairman & Managing Director Air India Ltd. Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai 21 Dy. General Manager IGI Airport, New Delhi Terminal 2, Gurgaon Road New Delhi - 110037 ....Appellant VS Shri Madan Mohan Lal Das S/o Late Shri Gangadhar Lal R/o 12, Aparajita Apartment P.O. & P. S. Agamkuan Distt. Patna (Bihar) Also at: Shri Madan Mohan Lal Das C/o Shri R. K. Karna, I.D.A.S. M-15, Andrews Ganj Extension New Delhi - 110049 ..Respondent CORAM SALMA NOOR, Presiding Member
N P KAUSHIK, Member (Judicial)
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not?
N P KAUSHIK, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
1. Appeal is directed against the orders dated 7th September, 2012 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum VII. Vide impugned orders Ld. District Forum directed the appellant/OP to pay a sum of Rs.80,000/- to the complainant towards costs of missing baggage, amount spent by the complainants due to the delay of the flight, for physical harassment, mental agony and costs of litigation.
2. Facts in brief are that the complainant, who is a senior citizen planned to travel to UK and USA for six months with his wife who also is a senior citizen. The tour was for the period from 26.04.2007 to 26.10.2007. After reporting at the airport at New Delhi on 26.04.2007, they discovered that the flight was late by four hours. They had to wait in the early hours of the morning with empty stomachs. This resulted in reaching London late by four hours. The scheduled conveyance at the airport at London too had missed.
3. On return from US the complainant and his wife got preponed their journey by one day.
They got their ticket changed. On reaching Air India counter on 26th October, 2007 they were informed that the flight in question was full. They were advised to report on the next day. No arrangement for their stay was made by the Air India i.e. Appellant herein. On their reporting on the next day at the airport, an excess amount of 100 pounds each was charged from them.
Agony of the complainants did not end here. At New Delhi airport, they found their baggage missing. They had to purchase their clothing and articles of daily use at IGI Airport, New Delhi. After waiting for a period of five days they were provided only three missing baggage, one baggage still remained untraced. Complainants were compelled to stay in New Delhi from 26th October to 15th November, 2007. They left for Patna after authorizing one of their relatives to receive the claimed amounts of missing baggage. On 28th December 2007 only, the said relative received a cheque for an amount of Rs.5,583/-. The amount was received with the remarks that the valuation had been done on the basis of the weight loss and @ 20 US Dollars per Kg. The missing baggage weighed 6 kg. Contention of the complainants is that they had made declaration of the value of missing baggage at 425 US Dollars and in terms of UK Pounds it was 400 Pounds. The complainants returned the cheque of Rs.5,583/-. The complainant assessed their loss to Rs.1,98,350/-.
4. Contention of the OP/Air India is that the value of the expensive items had to be declared in advance and proper insurance cover was required for the same. The said terms and conditions were allegedly recorded at the back of the ticket. Loss was assessed @ 20 US Dollars per Kg. There are averments and counter averments in relation to rude behavior of the employees of the Appellant/Air India.
5. It is an admitted case that there was a delay of the flight while boarding at New Delhi for a period of four hours. Ld. Counsel for the appellant Ms. Babita, Advocate has argued that the appellant in its written version denied if the complainants had to remain empty stomach during these hours. Admittedly the flight itself came to the airport late by four hours. Clearly the complainants and other passengers had not boarded the flight and obviously not served with the refreshments/meals. The denial of the plea by the appellant is, therefore, of no avail to it. Reaching of the flight late by four hours in London obviously caused disturbance in the arrangement of the conveyance made by the complainant at London airport. It is also admitted by the appellant that the return flight from London as per preponed ticket could not be made available.
6. It is also admitted case that the baggage of the complainants which were four in number were also not traceable for a period of five days at New Delhi Airport.
7. Ld. District Forum awarded compensation of Rs.80,000/- only for the inconvenience caused to the complainants in delay of the flight at New Delhi Airport, disturbance in getting conveyance at London airport, one days delay in getting a return flight from London, five days delay in tracing the missing baggage, the compensation for the baggage which remains untraced so far and the forced stay of the complainants in Delhi for a period of 18 days. There is no dispute with the fact that the complainants made declaration of the value of the baggage carried by them at the counter of Customs on their arrival at IGI Airport, New Delhi. The said declaration was made by them when they were asked to do so by the Customs officials. At that point of time, the complainants were not contemplating the loss of their baggage. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the value of the baggage declared by them at that point of time.
Admittedly the appellant/Air India had assessed the value of the baggage as per the weight of the same.
8. The appellants have filed the present appeal knowing fully well that the amount of Rs.80,000/- awarded for the harassment, inconvenience detailed above, was a pittance. The complainants were dragged in the litigation of appeal as well. Appeal is hence dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/-.
9. FDR, if any, deposited by the appellant be released after completing due formalities.
10. A copy of this order be provided to the parties free of costs. Copy of this order be also sent to concerned District Forum and thereafter file be consigned to Records.
(Salma Noor) Presiding Member (N P Kaushik) Member (Judicial) NV