Skip to main content

SpiceJet to pay Rs 28K for failing to take care of luggage

Budget carrier SpiceJet has been directed by a consumer forum here to pay a compensation of Rs 28,000 to a couple for failing to take care of their luggage, which was damaged and tampered with while in transit.

The South West District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum noted that the luggage was intact when it was checked-in by the complainants at Srinagar Airport, but on reaching Delhi Airport one of the bags was found to be damaged with its lock removed.

"The tampering has been done during transit, when the baggage was in the custody of the opposite party (SpiceJet), which failed to take proper and adequate care of the properties entrusted to them by a consumer and are liable for deficiency in service," a bench presided by Narendra Kumar said.

The forum directed the airline to pay the complainants, Delhi residents R Raja and M Nuthan R Ballal, Rs 20,289 towards items found missing from their luggage and Rs 8,000 as compensation and litigation cost.

The couple had submitted in their complaint that when they boarded the flight from Srinagar, they had checked-in seven pieces of luggage which were locked. When they arrived in Delhi, they found that one of the bags was torn, its lock removed and some of its contents missing.

They had immediately brought the matter to the attention of the airline's representatives and had also given them the list of the articles missing from the bag, however, SpiceJet had refused to compensate them for the loss, they had alleged.

In its defence, SpiceJet had contended that primarily their liability is limited to paying an amount of Rs 3,000 as compensation and secondly the instant case was one of alleged theft of which there is no proof. The forum, however, rejected the contentions of the airline.

Article referred: http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/spicejet-to-pay-rs-28k-for-failing-to-take-care-of-luggage_866609.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...
Post a Comment
Read more

Person Being Prosecuted To Be Provided With All Relevant Documents

The Delhi High Court, in the case of Poonam Jain vs Union of India & Ors, noted that a person being prosecuted against has a right to be provided with all the material relied upon by the prosecuting agency to prosecute her/ him. In the instant case, a search was conducted at the residences of the petitioners and their statements were recorded and several documents were seized. They were issued show cause notices under Section 276 C(1) and Section 277 of the Income Tax Act, Section 181 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 50 and 51 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act. They sought to be provided with a copy of their statements and the documents seised. However, the same was denied to them.
Post a Comment
Read more