The complaint (now a retired PSU bank manager) and his three family members booked four air tickets from Air India on December 13, 2003 for a journey from Thiruvananthapuram to Dibrugarh via Chennai and Kolkata. The flight travel plan was like this:
- Thiruvananthapuram to Chennai: Air India IC 932, December 18, 2003
- Chennai to Kolkata: Air India IC 766, December 18, 2003
- Kolkata to Dibrugarh: Air India IC 701, December 19, 2003
The first flight AI IC 932 was supposed to depart from Thiruvananthapuram at 2.30 pm but was delayed by more than one-and-a-half hours. The said flight was later diverted through Coimbatore and reached Chennai at 5.15 pm on the same day instead of the original arrival time of 3.40 pm. This resulted in the complainant missing their Kolkata bound flight from Chennai as that flight (AI IC 766) departed on time.
Also Read: Flight delayed, cancelled due to fog? You can get up to Rs 2 lakh if you have a travel insurance
What did Air India do to manage the situation?
Air India made alternative arrangements through Bengaluru and booked the complainants tickets in a 6 am Bengaluru-Kolkata flight departing on December 19, 2003. Air India booked a hotel for the complainant and his family in Bengaluru. The complainants reached Kolkata at 7.50 am and were issued boarding passes for the Dibrugarh bound flight (AI IC 701) on December 19, 2003.The Dibrugarh bound flight AI IC 701 was coming from Delhi with a halt in Kolkata.
“But the connecting flight from Delhi to Dibrugarh did not reach Kolkata. The Complainants were kept entangled inside the Kolkata Airport up to 3 pm by intermittent announcement of postponement of flight without any breakfast and lunch or other facilities. Finally, it was announced after 3.30 pm that the flight to Dibrugarh was cancelled,” claimed the complainants.
Air India made alternative arrangements and booked all the co-travellers on another flight to Dibrugarh scheduled for the next morning. The airline also booked a room for them in a hotel at 5.30 pm on December 19, 2003. Next day another Air India flight took all the affected family members to Dibrugarh. On December 20, 2003 all the complainants reached Dibrugarh instead of December 19 as planned originally.
Aggrieved by the loss, the complainants sent a legal notice to the airline on January 19, 2004 for making good on the loss sustained and a compensation. In a reply to this legal notice, the airline admitted their liability and deficiency of service and apologised. The airline gave the complainants four domestic return tickets from Trivandrum to any point in India.
The complainants did not accept this compensation by the airline and filed a case in the District Consumer Forum.
Fight Starts in District Consumer Forum
On September 30, 2011, the District Consumer Forum passed an order favourable to the complainants.
The District Consumer Forum’s order read: “In the result, a complaint is allowed. Opposite parties shall jointly and severally pay the complainants a sum of Rs 50,000 towards compensation along with Rs 2,000 as cost within two months from the date of receipt of this order.”
However, neither the complainants nor the airline was happy with the order. Hence, both parties filed an appeal before the State Consumer Forum.
Fight drags on to State Consumer Forum
On March 25, 2013, the State Consumer Forum passed an order favourable to the complainants. The order read, “This commission modified the amount and compensation as Rs 1 lakh instead of Rs 50,000 which was ordered by the District Forum below and along with a cost of Rs 2,000.”
Both the airline and the complainants appealed against the order of the State Consumer Forum.
Why Air India alleged that the complaint was at fault
Air India maintained a position that they were not at fault because the flights were delayed and diverted due to technical reasons beyond their control.
Air India said, “It is further contended that such contingencies are also duly included in the conditions of contracts of carriage which are printed in all air tickets including the tickets issued to the complainants. Therefore, an aircraft which is not cleared for technical safety and CAR (Civil Aviation Requirement) Regulation cannot be allowed to operate and the same can be classified as a force majeure circumstance and the petitioner airline cannot be blamed for deficiency of any service. Without the permission of the controlling authority, flights are not allowed to take off and such delays/cancellation cannot be attributable on the part of the Airlines.”
In its defence Air India further said, “On December 18, 2003, the flight was delayed and diverted to Coimbatore due to technical reasons, which is beyond the control of the Airline. The Airline had communicated and made all necessary announcements in a timely manner about the diversion of the route. Thereafter, the complainants were taken to Bengaluru to avoid further delay in their journey and were provided accommodation to Hotel Grand Ashok.”
Air India also clarified that the complainants were stuck at Kolkata Airport due to delay of incoming the aircraft. Air India said, “Information was received that the flight was unable to take off due to technical reasons which further resulted in non-availability of aircraft at Kolkata to operate on December 19, 2003. The announcement for postponement was made around 12.30 pm. The Complainants have misguided the consumer forum by submitting that the reasons for delay/cancellation were not explained to them.”
Fight ends in NCDRC after 10 years
After going through all the facts and evidence, NCDRC passed an order on December 6, 2023. They said, “We are of the considered view that the unilaterally printed terms and conditions on the jacket of the ticket that “The company is not liable for damage occasioned by delay in the carriage by air of passengers or baggage”, to which the Airline is taking recourse, is of no avail to Airline, unless there are sound and valid reasons for such delays and diversions/re-routing. In the instant case, the Airline has not been able to show any valid reason for such delays, diversions and cancellations, except the generalised statement of ‘due to technical reasons’.”
NCDRC also opined that the Airline need to provide travellers with timely information about such delays/diversions/re-routing/cancellation etc., with valid reasons, subject to safety and security consideration, like bad weather conditions, technical snag of aircraft, late arrival of aircraft from previous sector, late arrival of crew/flight attendants etc. and/or any such reason(s) which do not impact the safety and security of the passengers or airline system or violate any guidelines of the Airline regulator.
NCDRC further said in their order, “The facts and circumstances of the present case show that Airline failed to perform their obligations in the given situations and hence are guilty of deficiency in service towards complainants, entitling them to compensation. Hence, we enhance the compensation to Rs 1.75 lakhs (total for all the four complainants). In addition, we award litigation costs of Rs 25,000 to be paid by Airline to the complainants along with a simple interest of 6% p.a. from date of complaint till the date of actual payment.”
The compensation amount excluding litigation expenses and including interest comes to around Rs 3.85 lakh (1.75 lakh + 1.75 lakh x 6% x 20 years).