Shree Subhlaxmi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd vs Chand Mal Baradia And Others on 29 March, 2005
7. Shri Ankit Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellants
(OPs) has filed written arguments in which it is mentioned that District
Forum, Raipur has exceeded its territorial jurisdiction in view of specific
clause 18 of the Terms and Conditions of Carriage. He further argued
that the impugned order passed by the learned District Forum, is
erroneous and the District Forum has wrongly fastened liability on loss
of baggage of the respondent on the appellants (OPs. The respondent
(complainant) is only entitled to get Rs.200/- per kg and maximum
Rs.3,000/- in respect of loss of baggage from the appellants (OPs). The
appellants (OPs) are ready to pay the said amount to the respondent
(complainant), but the respondent (complainant) is not willing to receive
the said amount form the appellants (OPs). Learned District Form has
wrongly awarded a sum of Rs.45,000/- and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
towards compensation for mental agony to the respondent
(complainant) which are highly exorbitant. The respondent
(complainant) is not entitled to get any compensation from the
appellants (OPs), therefore, the appeal of the appellants (OPs) be allowed
and the impugned order be set aside. He placed reliance on judgements
of Hon'ble Supreme Court in ABC Laminart Pvt. Ltd. vs. A.P. Agencies
reported in (1989) 2 SCC 163; Shree Subhlaxmi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. vs.
Chand Mal Baradia & Ors. reported in (2005) 10 SCC 704; Angile
Insulation vs. Davy Ashmore India Ltd. (1995) 4 SCC 153; Hakam
Singh vs. M/s Gammon (India) Ltd., 1971 (1) SCC 286; M/s Interglobe
Aviation Ltd. vs. N. Sachidanand, reported in (2011) 7 SCC 463;