Spent Rs 3 lakh, got ‘broken seats and foul odour’: Father-daughter win consumer case against Air India

A Consumer Commission in Delhi has directed Air India to pay Rs 1.5 lakh to a father and daughter, who were travelling from Delhi to New York in September 2023, over “deficiency in service”.

The petitioner, Shailendra Bhatnagar, and his daughter, had submitted before the Commission that they had the “worst” travel experience with Air India.

Despite spending over Rs 3 lakh on the tickets, they had claimed the seats were broken, backrest buttons were not working, and that the flight attendant call button was also defective. They also complained of a bad odour.

In a January 14 order, the Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held: “If the airline fails to provide facilities that are mandatory under DGCA [Directorate General of Civil Aviation] rules (like food, water, AC, communication, accommodation, or information about delay/cancellation), that amounts to ‘deficiency in service’. The passenger can then claim for refund and/or compensation.”

In December, following the Indigo fiasco when thousands of its flights were cancelled, the Delhi High Court had said there has to be compensation not only for cancellations and damages for the passengers’ sufferings and agony.

Clauses under the DGCA circular of August 6, 2010, includes stipulations and conditions under which airline service providers have to pay compensation to travellers.

To prove his case, the complainant placed on record photographs of the seats allotted to him and a legal notice which he had served to the airlines.

The Commission said: “The complainant sent a legal notice on 01.11.2023. There was no answer to the legal notice. In the legal notice, all allegations, as made in the present complaint, are there but OP-1 maintained silence. Had there been no fault with the services of OP-1 [Air India], surely OP-1 must have reacted sharply.”

“During the course of arguments, we were very specific to put to OP-1 as to why OP-1 has given a very vague reply to paragraphs 4 to 9 of the complaint, wherein serious allegations relating to poor facilities and services of OP-1 are made. No satisfactory answer is given,” it added.

It said “keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Commission is of the view that the complainant will be entitled for compensation for… mental agony and harassment [caused by] not providing facilities for which a considerable amount was charged by OP-1.”

While Rs 50,000 each for father and daughter was directed to be given as compensation, Rs 50,000 was earmarked for litigation expenses.