Airline liability for baggage loss under Warsaw Convention limits compensation to declared weight, while mental agony claims can warrant additional compensation.

1. The appellants herein / Opposite Parties / Air India Limited have filed the present Appeal, seeking this Commission to set aside the order, dated 26.11.2015, passed by the DCDRF - South, Chennai, in C.C. No. 647 of 2009, in and by which, the District Forum allowed the complaint in part by directing the Air India to pay a sum of Rs.50,000 to the complainant as compensation and also Rs.5,000 towards litigation expenses.

2. The case of the complainant / respondent herein, as reflected from the complaint filed before the District forum, in brief, is as follows:
The complainant, who was working as a Consultant in the United States, travelled from New York to Chennai on 6.1.2009 by an Air India Flight belonging to the Opposite Parties. On the date of journey, she booked 4 pieces of baggage at the New York Airport by paying necessary baggage charges and, on reaching the Chennai Airport on 8.1.2009, while waiting at the Baggage Clearance Spot, to her utter shock and dismay, she received only two pieces of baggage and the other two bearing No. A1758724 / medium size black pierre cardin suitcase with wheels approximately weighing 24 kgs. and A1376633 / Black Trolley with wheels pierre cardin suitcase approximately weighing 28 kgs, were found missing. Immediately, the complainant had lodged a complaint with the Customs Department at the Anna International Airport, Chennai. After a lapse of 10 days, the Opposite Parties traced the 3rd piece / baggage bearing No. A1-758724 from Ahmedabad and handed over the same to the complainant by assuring her that they would trace out the other missing bag shortly. While so, the complainant received a forwarding message from the Chennai Office of the Opposite Parties that the other baggage was also located at Ahmedabad and the same would be delivered on 15.1.2009, however, they failed and neglected to followup / hand over the said baggage. In spite of the continuous efforts made by the complainant, she did not receive any information from the Opposite Parties. The said conduct of the Opposite Parties would not only amount to deficiency in service, negligence, dereliction of duty but also unfair trade practice in the matter of handling the baggage. Hence, through a legal notice, dated 29.1.2009, she called upon the 1st opposite party to restore the missing baggage or pay a sum of Rs. 1,35,000 in lieu of the lost baggage and also to pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 towards compensation for the mental agony and physical strain & stress undergone by her due to their deficiency in service, negligence etc; for which, it was replied by the Opposite Parties that the matter was referred to their Headquarters at Mumbai and they would get back, soon after the reply from the Headquarters. While so, by letter, dated 10.2.2009, the Opposite Parties sent a cheque for Rs. 19,556 purporting to be in full and final settlement of her claim. Since the said cheque amount was only a paltry sum as against the complainant’s claim for Rs. 1,35,000 towards the lost baggage and since the Opposite Parties did not come forward to pay compensation as previously demanded, a legal notice, dated 11.6.2009, was sent to the Opposite Parties, calling upon them to comply with the demands made in her previous legal notice, dated 29.1.2009, for which, by reply dated 19.6.2009, the Opposite Parties stated that they had already paid Rs. 19,556 towards full and final settlement and thereby, declined to accede to her demand. Hence, she filed the complaint before the District Forum, seeking to direct the Opposite Parties to pay to her Rs. 1,15,444 towards the value of the lost item together with interest @ 18% p.a. from 8.1.2009 till the date of payment; to refund $123 being the excess ba