INDIAN AIRLINES LIMITED Vs. PRAKRITHI SHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the District Forum, Bangalore (Urban) in Complaint No.3024/92 finding fault with the opposite party-Indian Airlines for deficiency in service.

(2.) The case of the complainant is that on 10.4.1992 when she reached Bombay, having travelled from Bangalore in Flight No. IC-110, her two pieces of registered baggages bearing tag Nos.820751 and 820752 had not arrived. She, therefore, lodged a complaint at Bombay Airport and despite promises from the authorities that the baggages will arrive by the next flight, they arrived on 11.4.1992; but then it was noticed at once that the baggages had been tampered with, and when they were opened in the presence of Airport Authorities, it was found that certain articles including gold ornaments of the approximate value of Rs.50,000/- were missing. A written complaint was therefore filed before the Airport Authorities the same day, calling for payment of compensation for the loss sustained, but according to the complainant, her request fell on deaf ears till 15.10.1992, on which date she received a reply from the opposite party denying any pilferage of articles while the baggages were in their custody. This was followed by a further communication dated 29.10.1992 stating that as there was no weight loss in the baggages when delivered at Bombay, the complainant is not entitled for any compensation. Aggrieved by such a stand, the complainant approached the District Forum for the redressal of her grievances. This is the long and short of the allegations against the opposite party in the complaint filed before the District Forum.

(3.) In the statement of objections filed before the District Forum, the opposite party has denied the allegations stoutly. According to the opposite party, in spite of best efforts made by the Airpot staff at Bangalore, the complainant failed to identify her baggages before being loaded in the aircraft and, therefore, to avoid delay, the flight took off, sans two baggages. However, they were sent in good condition in the next day's flight, after being kept in safe custody till they were loaded. It is alleged that the complainant was responsible for creation of such a situation by failing to identify her baggages, before boarding. It is also alleged that the complainant has neither disclosed the contents of the baggages while checking-in, nor has she taken precautions to insure the contents, and having failed in both, she has no cause of action to claim any compensation for items which were never lost. It is also contended at the same breath that if ever any liability comes to be fastened on the opposite party, their liability is limited to Rs.300/- per kilo of baggage lost or damaged, but in this case, despite the allegation of loss of articles including sarees, shirts, sandals and a 'canon' Camera, the weight of the baggage on arrival at Bombay was 25 kilos, as against the declared weight of 20 kgs. at Bangalore Airport and, therefore, according to the conditions of carriage printed on the Air Ticket jacket, there is no liability whatsoever on the opposite party to pay any compensation to the complainant. It was also contended that the complainant had violated the instructions prominently displayed in all Airports that the passengers should carry cash, jewellery and other valuables in their hand-bags as cabin luggage and hence she has no cause of action to cry foul when something went wrong.