DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
SALMA NOOR, N.P. KAUSHIK, JJ.
AIR India Ltd. and Another – Petitioners
Versus
Madan Mohan Lal Das – Respondent
First Appeal No. 971 of 2012
Decided On : 29-05-2013
Airline passengers are entitled to compensation for inconvenience caused by flight delays, missing baggage, and forced stay, based on the airline's admission of fault and the credibility of the passengers' baggage value declaration.
Headnote:
Consumer Disputes - Airline Passenger Rights - The court awarded compensation to the complainants for the inconvenience caused due to flight delays, missing baggage, and forced stay, based on the airline's admission of fault and the complainants' declaration of the baggage value.
Fact of the Case:
The complainants, senior citizens, faced flight delays, missed conveyance, and missing baggage during their travel, leading to inconvenience and forced stay in Delhi.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the airline admitted to the flight delay and missing baggage, and the complainants' declaration of baggage value was credible. It awarded compensation for the inconvenience caused.
Issues: Inconvenience due to flight delays, missed conveyance, missing baggage, and forced stay, and the credibility of the complainants' baggage value declaration.
Ratio Decidendi: The airline's admission of fault and the complainants' credible declaration of baggage value influenced the court's decision to award compensation.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court awarded compensation to the complainants for the inconvenience caused, with costs imposed on the airline.
ORDER :
1. Appeal is directed against the orders dated 7th September, 2012 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum - VII. Vide impugned orders learned District Forum directed the appellant/OP to pay a sum of Rs. 80,000 to the complainant towards costs of missing baggage, amount spent by the complainants due to the delay of the flight, for physical harassment, mental agony and costs of litigation.
2. Facts in brief are that the complainant, who is a senior citizen planned to travel to UK and USA for six months with his wife who also is a senior citizen. The tour was for the period from 26.4.2007 to 26.10.2007. After reporting at the airport at New Delhi on 26.4.2007, they discovered that the flight was late by four hours. They had to wait in the early hours of the morning with empty stomachs. This resulted in reaching London late by four hours. The scheduled conveyance at the airport at London too had missed.
3. On return from US the complainant and his wife got proponed their journey by one day. They got their ticket changed. On reaching Air India counter on 26th October, 2007 they were informed that the flight in question was full. They were advised to report on the next day. No arrangement for their stay was made by the Air India i.e. Appellant herein. On their reporting on the next day at the airport, an excess amount of 100 pounds each was charged from them. Agony of the complainants did not end here. At New Delhi airport, they found their baggage missing. They had to purchase their clothing and articles of daily use at IGI Airport, New Delhi. After waiting for a period of five days they were provided only three missing baggage, one baggage still remained untraced. Complainants were compelled to stay in New Delhi from 26th October to 15th November, 2007. They left for Patna after authorizing one of their relatives to receive the claimed amounts of missing baggage. On 28th December 2007 only, the said relative received a cheque for an amount of Rs. 5,583. The amount was received with the remarks that the valuation had been done on the basis of the weight loss and @ 20 US Dollars per kg. The missing baggage weighed 6 kg. Contention of the complainants is that they had made declaration of the value of missing baggage at 425 US Dollars and in terms of UK Pounds it was 400 Pounds. The complainants returned the cheque of Rs. 5,583. The complainant assessed their loss to Rs. 1,98,350.
4. Contention of the OP/Air India is that the value of the expensive items had to be declared in advance and proper insurance cover was required for the same. The said terms and conditions were allegedly recorded at the back of the ticket. Loss was assessed @ 20 US Dollars per kg. There are averments and counter averments in relation to rude behaviour of the employees of the Appellant/Air India.
5. It is an admitted case that there was a delay of the flight while boarding at New Delhi for a period of four hours. Learned Counsel for the appellant Ms. Babita, Advocate has argued that the appellant in its written version denied if the complainants had to remain empty stomach during these hours. Admittedly the flight itself came to the airport late by four hours. Clearly the complainants and other passengers had not boarded the flight and obviously not served with the refreshments/meals. The denial of the plea by the appellant is, therefore, of no avail to it. Reaching of the flight late by four hours in London obviously caused disturbance in the arrangement of the conveyance made by the complainant at London airport. It is also admitted by the appellant that the return flight from London as per proponed ticket could not be made available.
6. It is also admitted case that the baggage of the complainants which were four in number were also not traceable for a period of five days at New Delhi Airport.
7. Learned District Forum awarded compensation of Rs. 80,000 only for the inconvenience caused to the complainants in delay of the flight at New Delhi Airp