When Your Airline Treats You Like Excess Baggage

This scenario is not limited to international airlines. Take the case of sporting personality, Abdul Majid. He had bought a waitlisted ticket on Indian Airlines to travel from Chennai to Kochi on October 9, 1991. The ticket was confirmed and Majid boarded the aircraft and occupied the allotted seat. He was then approached by the Duty Officer of Indian Airlines and two other airline staffers who asked him to alight from the aircraft. Majid declined to do so. Then, on the pretext of checking his baggage, the officers dragged him out of the aircraft. Majids shirt was torn and he was subjected to public humiliation. Two other waitlisted passengers who had been confirmed, were also unceremoniously bundled out from the aircraft. Majids baggage was not returned to him; he was left stranded at Chennai for two days without a change of clothes and had to return to Kochi by alternative means,

 

Majid filed a case before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Chennai for Rs 1,50,000 as compensation. The airline tried to escape liability with the explanation that Majid had been allotted a confirmed seat under the mistaken impression that three passengers with confirmed tickets had failed to show up. It was denied that any force had been used to evict Majid. Reliance was also placed on Clause 4 of the Non-International (Carriage of Passengers and Baggage) Regulations, 1989, under which the Corporation has the right to decide which passenger or article shall be offloaded.

The State Commission held that there was deficiency in service and awarded compensation of Rs 10,000 and costs of Rs 1,000 to Majid. Aggrieved by this order, two cross appeals (by Majid and Indian Airlines) were filed before the National Commission (NC). But the NC upheld the State Commissions verdict.

While Majids is an extreme case, it is not an isolated instance of airlines bungling. Sunil Goyal booked six seats on Indian Airlines on January 9, 1989 ex-Trivandrum. At the airport, he was told that his tickets were the first six on the waiting list. Goyal was then told that the Airlines could provide him with only four seats against the six tickets. He alleged that the person at the counter asked for an additional Rs 200 per ticket for the remaining two passengers. Goyal refused to pay up, and the seats were allotted to those below him on the waiting list. According to Goyal, this was done because they were not chary of paying the money. Goyals wife and child waitlisted passengers nos 5 and 6 had to remain in Trivandrum, suffering inconvenience, expenses and mental agony. Goyal filed a case for compensation against Indian Airlines.

The State Commission concluded that Indian Airlines had rendered deficient services under Section 2 (1) (g) of the Consumer Protection Act. It held that a compensation of Rs 7,000 was fair as allegations could not be proved by Goyal, and directed the Airlines to pay up within a month.

H R Shah, his wife and another couple booked return tickets from Delhi to Kulu Manali, paying Rs 16,460 as the all-inclusive fare. Shah and his co-passengers reported at Delhi Airport for the flight for which the scheduled departure time was 1.15 pm. However they were informed that their flight had left at 12 pm! Their request to be accommodated on the next flight was turned down and their money was not refunded. To add insult to injury, the airline officials told Shah to go to Kulu by taxi or other means.

The group had hotel bookings at Kulu, and decided to travel by taxi for which they shelled out Rs 4,000. Their misery however had not ended. When they reported at Kulu Airport at 11 am for their return flight due to leave at 2.55 pm, they were told that it was on time and were issued boarding cards. However, they were kept waiting till 5 pm, at which point they were told that the flight had been cancelled. They requested the airline to give them accommodation and passage by the next flight. The officials refused, and left with no alternative, they travelled to Delhi by taxi a journey which took 17 hours and, again, cost them Rs 4,000. Exhausted, they cancelled their rail bookings and flew home to Ahmedabad.

Shah complained to the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum which held that Jagson Airlines failure to inform Shah about the change in flight timings amounted to deficiency in service. As no explanation for the cancellation of the Kulu-Delhi flight was offered other than bad weather which was found to be untrue as a Vayudoot flight from Kulu to Delhi had departed on time the Commission held the Airlines negligent and deficient in its service. Shah and his co-passengers were awarded compensation of Rs 20,000 each.

Despite the competition in the air travel business, bumping passengers, overbookings and delayed departures of flights continue to be a regular feature. Customers pay for quick and comfortable journeys and, with consumer courts lending a helping hand, airlines should realise that they cannot be taken for a ride any more.

Rosy Kumar (The author is an advocate and editor of the Consumer Protection and Trade Practices Journal)