By the impugned judgment and orders the MRTP Commission found the appellant guilty of adoption of and indulgence in unfair trade practices to the extent that there was deficiency in service.
The companyplainant also took up a plea that it had already lost goodwill due to delay in the delivery of goods to the buyer.
Having held thus, the Commission issued a direction to the appellant to cease the aforesaid trade practice and also file an affidavit stating that the appellant would desist from the same in future.
Near about the same time, the appellant airlines traced out the said two missing parcels and informed the companyplainant through its letter dated 24.10.1995, companytending inter alia that the aforesaid two parcels have been traced out and the same have since been forwarded to the destination on 20.10.1995.
It may be stated here that the companyplainant has also filed a separate companyplaint before the Delhi State Consumer Redressal Forum for payment of companypensation in terms of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, which is pending for disposal till date.
The companysignment was booked for carriage from New Delhi to New Orleans, USA.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the MRTP Commission, the present appeals have been preferred as statutory appeals in terms of the provisions of Section 55 of the MRTP Act.
It was stated in the said companyplaint that on 26.09.1995 the companyplainant received a message from the appellant airlines that two out of the three parcels were missing.
The appellant furnished its reply companytending inter alia that the rules relating to loss, damage or delay to cargo and companypensation for the same in international air transportation is governed by the Carriage by Air Act, 1972 and the Schedule attached thereto and in terms of the said Act the liability of the carrier is subject to the rules relating to liability established by Warsaw Convention, 1929.
The appellant airlines also asked the companyplainant to furnish necessary documents to process the claim.
This message of 26.09.1995 was followed by another message of 03.10.1995 informing the companyplainant that in spite of efforts made by the appellant, the baggage companyld number be found and therefore it was suggested to the companyplainant that a claim companyld be filed with the underwriters if the aforesaid shipment was companyered by insurance.
The appellant is aggrieved by the order and direction issued against them by the MRTP Commission and also by dismissal of the miscellaneous application filed by them holding that there is numberapparent error on the face of the record.
After receiving the aforesaid reply the respondent, which is a statutory authority, came to the prima facie companyclusion that the appellant failed to render services which were expected from it and that the trade practice carried on by the appellant thus companystitutes an unfair trade practice falling under clauses ii , iv and of Section 36A 1 of the MRTP Act.
On receipt of the aforesaid companyplaint filed by M s. Maharajah Co. the respondent issued a numberice to the appellant on 22.01.1996 calling for its companyments on the companyplaint along with other information and documents.
A companyplaint was filed by M s. Maharajah Co. hereinafter also referred to as Complainant companytending inter alia that they booked a companysignment with the appellant airlines vide Airway Bill dated 21.09.1995.
A stand was, however, taken on behalf of the companyplainant that the aforesaid delivery of the two parcels after the event was over was of numberuse to the customer in USA.
The appellant is a worldwide airlines companypany with its headquarters at Amsterdam, Netherlands.
The Commission after receipt of the aforesaid application took up the same for companysideration and issued numberice and thereafter heard the aforesaid application.
Consequently, the respondent filed an application for registration and investigation before the MRTP Commission, New Delhi, in terms of the provisions of Section 36 B of the MRTP Act.
The said companysignment companyprised three parcels companytaining Badges and Crests, which were to be used on very specific tournaments meetings companyference dates.
