BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC. Vs. GEMS ART FACTORY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant carrying business under the name and style of M/s. Gems Art Factory at Jaipur, received a letter from one Mr. S.B. Vohra for supply of four handmade silk carpets worth US $ 8000. The buyer made payment through his credit card and a bank draft. The goods were to be delivered to the buyer in Detroit, USA. The complainant engaged opposite parties Nos.2 and 3 viz. Asia Transport Co. Pvt. Ltd. and Lyraid Pvt. Ltd, for the purpose of facilitating the transportation of the goods. The goods were then entrusted to the appellant-British Airways through opposite party No.2-Asia Transport Co. vide Airway bill dated 13-02-1997. On 17-3-1997, the complainant received a letter dated 28-2-1997, written by the appellant-British Airways to the opposite party No.2-Asia Transport Company, informing that the buyer had refused to take the delivery of the goods. The appellant also sought disposal instructions with respect to the aforesaid consignment. Thereupon the complainant instructed the appellant, on 20.3.1997, to rebook the goods for delivery to him, at his cost. However, the goods were not sent back to India. The buyer, on account of not receiving the goods in time, debited the amount, which he had paid to the complainant, to his account. Alleging deficiency on the part of the opposite parties including the appellant, a complaint was filed before the State Commission, seeking the following payments: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_664_NCDRC_2014_1.html</FRM>

(2.) The complaint was resisted by the appellant as well as by the opposite party No.2. It was stated in the reply that the appellant/respondent No.1 had informed the complainant about refusal of the consignee to accept the delivery of the consignment. However, the said letter was responded by the complainant only on 20-03-1997 and the consignment was, in the meanwhile, seized by the US custom on 24-03-1997. It was further stated in the reply that in view of the provisions contained in Section 20(1), Schedule I of the Carriage by Air Act, 1972, the appellant/respondent No.1 was not liable since it had taken all necessary measures to avoid the damage. It was also stated in the reply that since the complainant had not made any special declaration as to the value of the goods, the liability of the appellant/respondent No.1 was statutorily limited to US $ 20 per kg. and, therefore, the claim was to be restricted to US $ 60, weight of the consignment being only 3 kg..

(3.) The respondent-Asia Transport Company inter alia stated that the consignment in question was given by it to the appellant-British Airways on 14-02-1997 through its forwarding agent Lyraid Pvt. Ltd. (opposite party No.3). The consignment reached the destination on 20-02-1997. The letter dated 28-02-1997 was received by them from British Airways, in the first week of March, 1997 stating therein that the consignee has refused to accept the goods. The information was forwarded by them to Lyraid Pvt. Ltd. on 05-03-1997, but the complainant did not convey any direction regarding further action to be taken in the matter.