The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has directed Tata SIA Airlines (Vistara) to pay Rs 50,000 in 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.
Background of the Case
The complainants, Aayush Bansal and Abhishek Garg, both residents of Chandigarh, had booked domestic and international air tickets through Vistara for a holiday trip to Denpasar, Bali. On April 2, 2024, when they arrived at 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, leading to further expenses on local transportation. After sending a legal notice to the airline without receiving any relief, they approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh.
District Commission's Ruling
The District Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed Vistara 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 defense was struck off by the District Commission on July 17, 2024.
State Commission's Observations
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 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 bench observed: "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."
It further added: "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."
Enhanced Compensation
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 annum on the refund was upheld, with the bench observing it was just, fair, and in consonance with settled principles of consumer jurisprudence.
