Have you ever been denied to board the flight despite confirmed booking?

Denied boarding despite confirmed ticket entitles compensation not only for the monetary loss or injury suffered by the complainant but also for injustice suffered by the consumer

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, UT Chandigarh (for short the ‘District Forum’) in complaint case No. 603 of 2010 of Lata Sikri vs. Kingfisher Airlines for deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner-Airlines in not issuing the boarding pass to her on a Delhi-Hyderabad flight for which the complainant held confirmed / OK ticket partly allowed the complaint of the complainant with the following directions:

 “From the above detailed analysis of the entire case, we are of the considered opinion that the complaint must succeed.  So, we accept the complaint and decide the same in favour of the complainant and against the Ops.  The Ops are directed to issue a complementary return ticket to the complainant (as agreed), on any domestic flights operated by them.  Ops are further directed to pay Rs. 30,000/- to the complainant, jointly and severally, towards compensation for physical harassment, as well as mental agony caused to her, along with Rs. 10,000/-  as costs of litigation.  This order be complied with by the Ops, which one month, from the date of receipt of its copy, failing which, they shall pay the awarded amount along with penal interest @ 12% per annum from the date of filing of present complaint i.e. 04.10.2010, till the date of realization, apart from cost of litigation i.e. Rs. 10,000/-.”

“The main deficiency alleged by the complainant was that despite she having confirmed/OK ticket for a flight No. IT-802 scheduled to leave Delhi at 0925 hours and arrive at Hyderabad at 1135 hours, she was denied the boarding pass although other male member of the group were accommodated in the said flight.  After several hours, she was put on the flight of another Airlines viz. Spice Jet, which left Delhi around 1530 hours and reached Hyderabad late in the evening, as a result of which she could reach the ultimate destination Bihar on the following day at about 130 hours.  She being a woman remained apprehensive throughout the journey on flight as well as by road which caused her great mental torture and physical harassment.  It would appear that once the grievance was brought to the notice of the petitioner-Airlines, they as an act of remorse/goodwill gesture, offered her complementary return ticket on any domestic flight, which she declined  to accept and then filed the complaint.  The complaint was resisted by the petitioner-Airlines not disputing the above facts but they claim that there was no deficiency in service on their part and explained that complainant was denied boarding pass for the scheduled flight on the ground of over-booking of the flight.”

State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Union Territory Chandigarh in First Appeal No. 293 of 2011, Kingfisher Airlines Ltd.  Upheld the award given by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. Kingfisher Airlines Limited preferred REVISION PETITION NO. 27 OF 2012 before National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. National Commission in their judgment on 11^th October 2012 dismissed the revision petition and stated that:

 “The word ‘compensation’ is again of very wide connotation.  It has not been defined in the Act.  According to dictionary it means, ‘compensating or being compensated; thing given as recompense;.  In legal sense it may constitute actual loss or expected loss and may extend to physical, mental or even emotional suffering, insult or injury or loss.  Therefore, when the Commission has been vested with the jurisdiction to award value of goods or service and compensation it has to be construed widely enabling the Commission to determine compensation for any loss or damage suffered by a consumer which in law is otherwise included in wide meaning of compensation.  The provision in our opinion enables a consumer to claim and empowers the Commission to redress any injustice done to him.  The Commission or the Forum in the Act is thus entitled to award not only value of the goods or services but also compensate a consumer for injustice suffered by him.”

From the above, it is evident that the consumer fora are well within its rights to award compensation not only for the monetary loss or injury suffered by the complainant but also for injustice suffered by the consumer.  In the case in hand, going by the entirety of the facts and circumstances, we find that the fora below have done no wrong in awarding a compensation of Rs. 30,000/- to the respondent-complainant for the mental agony and harassment faced by her, besides, the return domestic ticket, which was offered by the petitioner-Airlines itself to the complainant in the very beginning