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

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/
Post a Comment
Read more

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