Jet Airways passenger's missing luggage found after 34 days
A day after mid-day reported 67-year-old Veena Seth's month-long missing baggage row, Jet Airways locates it yesterday morning at Jaipur airport. The luggage will be returned to her on Monday morning
Thirty-four days after Veena Seth’s baggage went untraceable, domestic carrier Jet Airways finally located her bag last morning at Jaipur airport.
Jet Airways had misplaced Veena Seth's luggage, containing valuables worth Rs 35,000
This comes after the airline had informed mid-day yesterday that neither did their system reflect any registration of Seth’s baggage nor was a missing case raised in the World Tracer, a global service that matches found bags with lost bag reports, at Mumbai.
Seth, 67, who had lodged the complaint on July 12, was surprised when she received four calls from the airlines last morning enquiring about her missing baggage, which contained valuables worth Rs 35,000. Seth explained, “I got calls from both, the Delhi and Mumbai staff.
They questioned me about all the items in my luggage and confirmed that they were finally successful in locating my bag in Jaipur and would have it delivered via one of their midnight flights.” The luggage will be restored with its owner on Monday morning.
“It looks like my belongings are safe. But since it has been missing for so long, I’ll be assured only when it reaches me,” she added. Lalit Mohan Seth, Veena’s husband, said, “These are the same people who I called incessantly for a month. I’m happy we will be receiving the luggage soon.”
Veena Seth, her daughter and grand-daughter, had visited the Golden Temple in Amritsar and were returning by 9W 2662 (Amritsar- Delhi). They had a connecting flight and after a gap of two hours, boarded 9W 352 (Delhi- Mumbai).
On landing in Mumbai, Seth was unable to find her luggage. The troubled passenger continued to follow-up with Jet Airways every day, only to receive a negative response. Though the Seths are frequent fliers, this was the first time that their luggage has been misplaced.