NEW DELHI: A state consumer commission has ordered an airline to pay Rs 50,000 compensation along with a full ticket refund of Rs 58,641 with interest and Rs 15,000 in litigation costs to two friends from Chandigarh who were stranded in Bali after their return flight was preponed without any prior notice.The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, upheld the District Commission’s finding of deficiency in service against Tata SIA Airlines (Vistara) while enhancing the compensation, holding that the meagre Rs 7,000 awarded by the lower forum was “wholly inadequate and does not reflect the true extent of the mental agony suffered.”What was the dispute?The case involved two friends Aayush Bansal and Abhishek Garg, both residents of Chandigarh, who had booked domestic and international air tickets through Tata SIA Airlines for a holiday trip to Denpasar, Bali.On April 2, 2024, when the two reached Denpasar Airport for their return journey to Delhi, they discovered that their scheduled flight had already been preponed by the airline without any prior intimation. Left stranded at a foreign airport with no assistance from the airline, they were forced to purchase new tickets at an additional cost of Rs 51,000. The delay in their return also caused them to miss their connecting domestic flight from Delhi to Chandigarh, pushing them to incur further expenses on local transportation.However, despite sending a legal notice to the airline, they got no relief, following which they approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh.What did the District Commission say?The District Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed Tata SIA Airlines to refund Rs 58,641 along with 9% annual interest. However, it awarded only Rs 7,000 as compensation for mental agony, a figure that the complainants challenged before the State Commission as grossly inadequate, given they had been stranded in a foreign country without any assistance.Notably, the airline failed to file its written response within the stipulated period, and its defence was struck off by the District Commission on July 17, 2024.What did the State Commission say?A bench comprising Justice Raj Shekhar Attri, President, and Mr. Preetinder Singh, Member, of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, agreed that the lower forum had under-compensated the complainants.The Commission further noted that the airline’s act of preponing the flight without notice was “a serious lapse in service, as timely communication of schedule changes is a fundamental obligation of an airline.”“The appellants had been left stranded at an international airport, a situation which naturally entails considerable stress, anxiety, and inconvenience. They had to make immediate alternate arrangements at a much higher cost, without any assistance from the respondents. The situation would have caused not only financial strain but also emotional distress, particularly in a foreign country where passengers are more vulnerable and dependent on proper coordination by service providers,” the bench observed.“Compensation in consumer matters is not only intended to reimburse losses but also to acknowledge the inconvenience and distress caused due to deficient services. It must be realistic and proportionate to the suffering endured,” it further added.Finding the Rs 7,000 compensation “on the lower side” and one that “failed to meet the ends of justice,” the State Commission enhanced it to Rs 50,000. It also awarded Rs 15,000 towards litigation expenses, noting that the District Commission had erred in not accounting for the legal costs the complainants had borne throughout the proceedings.The interest rate of 9 per cent per annum on the refund, however, was upheld, with the bench observing it was “just, fair, and in consonance with settled principles of consumer jurisprudence.”
