Bus conductor took his suitcase, it vanished: 11 years later, commission orders Rs 43k

AI generated image used for representative purposeNEW DELHI: The Uttarakhand state consumer commission has directed the Uttarakhand Transport Corporation to pay Rs 43,000 to a passenger whose suitcase went missing during a Delhi-Dehradun bus journey, after finding negligence on the part of the bus conductor. The commission reduced the compensation for the missing suitcase and items from Rs 57,500 to Rs 25,000 as the passenger could not prove the actual cost of the belongings. It also upheld Rs 15,000 compensation for mental agony and Rs 3,000 towards litigation costs.Why did the passenger file a complaint against Uttarakhand Transport Corporation?As per the commission order, the passenger and his wife travelled from Delhi to Dehradun on November 8, 2015, by deluxe bus after paying Rs 318 each as fare.The passenger alleged that he had placed his suitcase in the luggage compartment of the bus. However, the suitcase was missing when he reached Khatauli.He then added that the loss happened because of negligence by the bus conductor and sought Rs 57,500 for the suitcase and items kept inside it, along with compensation for mental agony and litigation expenses.The district consumer commission allowed the complaint and directed the conductor to pay Rs 57,500 towards the missing items, Rs 15,000 for mental agony and Rs 3,000 towards litigation charges.However, the conductor challenged the order before the state consumer commission.The conductor argued that passengers were responsible for taking care of their own luggage and that a warning to this effect was displayed on the bus. He claimed that the passenger was negligent in keeping his suitcase.The driver alleged that he had no responsibility for the passenger’s personal belongings, while the Uttarakhand Transport Corporation argued that it had not charged any separate amount for the luggage and therefore the dispute did not amount to a consumer dispute.Why did the consumer commission find the bus conductor negligent?The bench comprising President Kumkum Rani and member C M Singh observed that the passenger had handed over the suitcase to the conductor to be kept in the luggage compartment.The commission noted that the passenger’s tickets, complaints made to authorities and other documents were on record. It also considered an order passed by the Uttarakhand Transport Corporation, which had held the conductor responsible for the missing suitcase and the items inside it.“Thus, from the above order of Uttarakhand Transport Corporation, Dehradun in respect of the appellant, it is fully proved that due to negligence of Sh. Dharamveer Singh First - appellant (Conductor B. Depot, Dehradun), the suit case and clothes, jwellery etc. of the respondent No. 1 which were kept inside it, were lost during travelling from Delhi to Dehradun,” the commission noted.The commission further examined what happened after the conductor took custody of the suitcase. It noted that the conductor himself had stated that he locked the luggage compartment after taking the suitcase.“It is also pertinent to mention that the suit case of respondent No. 1 was handed over to the appellant to be kept in diggi and there is no dispute that the suit case in the bus was under the custody of the respondent No. 1, but it was in the custody of the appellant and as per paper No. 5Kha/7 to 5Kha/8 and in the questionnaire and answer thereto is also proved that as per the version of appellant – Sh. Dharamveer Singh – First Conductor, he locked the diggi after taking the lost suitcase alongwith items kept inside, but it was not found in ISBT, Dehradun and was not handed over to the respondent No. 1 by the appellant,” the bench added.The commission then concluded that the conductor was responsible for the loss.Reduction in compensationThe commission found that the passenger had not filed receipts or bills for the clothes, jewellery, medicines and other items claimed to have been lost.It therefore held that the actual cost of the belongings was not fully proved. However, considering the circumstances, the commission said the passenger was entitled to Rs 25,000 as a lump-sum amount for the suitcase and items inside it.The commission also examined whether the transport corporation could be made responsible for the conductor’s negligence.It noted that the bus was being operated by the driver under the control and instructions of the transport corporation and that the conductor was its employee working under its instructions.“Here it is pertinent to mention that the deluxe bus was being plied by the driver under the control and instructions of respondent No. 3 – opposite party No. 3 and the appellant is employee of respondent No. 3, who was working under the instructions and guidance of respondent No. 3, therefore, under vicarious liability, the department is entitled to pay the above mentioned compensation, i.e. Rs. 25,000/- as claim amount to the respondent No. 1 – complainant,” the commission concluded.The commission consequently reduced the amount awarded for the lost suitcase from Rs 57,500 to Rs 25,000, while retaining the compensation for mental agony and litigation charges.Final order:The commission partly allowed the conductor’s appeal and directed the transport corporation to:Pay Rs 25,000 towards the cost of the missing suitcase and items kept inside it, instead of the earlier Rs 57,500.Pay Rs 15,000 as compensation for mental agony.Pay Rs 3,000 towards litigation charges.Pay the Rs 25,000 compensation within two months from the date of the judgment.Pay 9 percent annual interest on the Rs 25,000 amount from March 11, 2016, until actual payment if it is not paid within two months.So, the transport corporation has been ordered to pay Rs 43,000 in compensation and litigation charges, apart from the applicable interest on the Rs 25,000 amount if payment is delayed.