SHIV GARG Vs. LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shiv Garg, Petitioner herein vide this revision petition has challenged the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission') in Appeal No.199/2004 decided in favour of Lufthansa German Airlines (Respondent No.1) and two others viz. Manager, Tower Assistance Ltd. (Respondent No.2) and Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. (Respondent No.3).

(2.) In his complaint before the District Forum, Petitioner/Complainant had contended that he had purchased a foreign travel and medical insurance policy after paying a premium of Rs.2,338/- from Respondent No.3 for the period from 13.06.1999 to 17.07.1999 with regard to loss of baggage, delay or health problems etc. Petitioner while travelling on 25.06.1999 on Respondent/Airlines lost his bag containing passport, foreign currency etc. for which a complaint was filed at Dan Hague, Holland. A baggage irregularity report was also lodged on 15.07.1999 on his arrival at Delhi Airport and again letters containing particulars were sent to Respondent/Airlines vide letters dated 26.05.2000 and 07.03.2001. However, despite this Petitioner did not receive any proper response nor the missing bags. Due to loss of baggage containing valuables, Petitioner had to undergo great discomfort and financial loss which included getting a fresh passport and losing a diamond necklace worth Rs.3,35,800/- and foreign currency worth US$ 1750. Petitioner thereafter filed a formal complaint vide his letter dated 07.04.2001 along with copies of the FIR etc. Petitioner also filed a complaint before the District Forum on 11.07.2001 and requested that he be compensated Rs.4,78,800/- along with interest @ 18% per annum as per following details : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_232_NCDRC_2012_1.html</FRM>

(3.) The above contentions were denied by Respondents. Respondent/Airlines denied that two bags were missing as alleged by the Petitioner and stated that Respondent/Airlines had no knowledge regarding any missing report filed in Holland. However, it was admitted that one bag (out of 5 booked) was reported missing when the Petitioner arrived at Delhi Airport for which a baggage irregularity report was filed. The missing bag was traced and reached Delhi 17.07.1999 and the Petitioner was informed immediately on 18.07.1999. Subsequently, a representative of the Petitioner collected the same and did not lodge any other complaint thereafter till 07.03.2001. Respondent/Airlines further stated that even though aberrations can occur when millions of pieces of baggage are handled each year all over the world, Respondent/Airlines was very diligent in tracing the baggage from three locations i.e. Chicago, Frankfurt and Delhi and restored the same within two days of Petitioner's filing the missing report on 15.07.1999. Respondent/Airlines also stated that the Petitioner kept quiet for several months and suddenly wrote to it on 17.03.2001 inquiring about his complaint dated 15.07.1999 which was not understandable since the matter had been settled and the missing luggage delivered to him. Respondent/Airlines further contended that the as per Article VIII of the Conditions of Carriage (Passenger and Baggage) of Respondent/Airlines, a passenger is not allowed to carry money, jewellery, precious metals, negotiable, papers, securities or other valuables, business documents etc. in the checked luggage. Therefore, even if there was any loss from inside the bag, Respondent/Airlines was not liable to make good this loss.