KYRGYZSTAN AIRLINES Vs. RAMESH BEHL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is an appeal against the order dated 23.5.2000 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalandhar (hereinafter called the District Forum ).

(2.) Brief facts, stated in the complaint are that on 26.6.1999, the respondent-complainant (hereinafter called the complainant) had purchased one return ticket from M/s. Aero World Travels, 112, Bhagat Singh Market, New Delhi-110001, Branch Office 201-Alfa Estate, 1st Floor, 39, G. T. Road, Jalandhar-144001 (opposite party No.1 before the District Forum hereinafter called opposite party No.1), at Jalandhar for the flight from Delhi to Birmingham on 27.6.1999 through flight of appellant-opposite party No.2 (hereinafter called opposite party No.2) on payment of Rs.18,000/-. On 27.6.1999 he had boarded the flight of opposite party No.2 at Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi and had handed over his baggage to the concerned persons of opposite party No.2 and the concerned persons of opposite party No.2 had issued Baggage Identification Tag. On reaching at Birmingham, the complainant had kept on waiting for his baggage for hours together but when he did not receive his baggage he had made complaint to the concerned Authorities of opposite party No.2 at Birmingham Airport, who had informed him to come on 1.7.1999 for the enquiry about his baggage. The complainant was staying in U. K with his relative Mr. P. S. Bedi. He was received at Birmingham by one of his friends Shri Davinder Singh Dade. The complainant had very little amount in his pocket on 27.6.1999, when he had alighted from Aircraft of the opposite party No.2 as all the money alongwith other articles were in his baggage, which was not delivered to him. It was then stated that the complainant due to these circumstances had to borrow $ 2000 for the purchase of necessary clothes, articles etc. for his daily use and to meet with the other expenditure. On 27.6.1999 after wasting couple of hours, the complainant had left the Birmingham Airport making complaints with regard to the non-receipt of his baggage. On 1.7.1999 he had come from Menchaster to Birmingham Airport as per promise of the concerned Authorities of opposite party No.2 by bus of National Express by paying $ 12 (twelve pounds only ). On reaching Birmingham Airport on 1.7.1999, the concerned Authorities had asked the complainant to come the next day i. e. on 2.7.1999. Then the complainant had again visited the concerned Authorities on 2.7.1999 and then the Authorities gave in writing to the complainant that the baggage of the complainant would be handed over to him at his local address by 4.7.1999 evening or on 5.7.1999 morning and after about eight days he had received his baggage. According to the complainant due to absence of his baggage, he had to purchase articles like woollen suits, shirts, underwear, vests socks, pair of shoes, sleeper, handkerchiefs, spectacles by spending $ 2000/-. Fruits and sweets, which were carried by the complainant as gifts for his friends and relatives were spoiled. Thus, according to the complainant this all happened due to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.2 in not delivering the baggage to him. According to the complainant, he had served a legal notice through his Counsel to opposite party No.2 for which he had received the reply, but his claim had not been settled by opposite parties. The complainant had claimed Rs.4 Lacs as damages for deficiency in service, negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties.

(3.) On notice being given to the opposite parties, opposite party No.1 in its written statement had admitted that the Air Ticket was purchased by the complainant through them. They had received legal notice from the Counsel for the complainant and had sent reply also. According to opposite party No.1, they were only Passenger Sales Agent of opposite party No.2 and they were authorised for only issuing tickets on their behalf. Handling of the baggage and providing of all other services to the passengers were done by the concerned Airlines. According to opposite party No.1 only the concerned Airline was responsible if there was any deficiency in service in not delivering the baggage at the place of its destination. Deficiency was on the part of opposite party No.2 and not on the part of opposite party No.1. Prayer for dismissal of the complaint was made.