Air India Failed To Refund ₹31,440 Despite Admitting Liability, Chandigarh Consumer Commission Rules

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T. Chandigarh, comprising President Pawanjit Singh and Member Brij Mohan Sharma, has partly allowed a consumer complaint against Air India Ltd., holding that the airline's failure to refund an admitted rescheduling amount, despite assuring in its written response that the refund was being processed, constitutes deficiency in service.

Facts:

The complainant booked a round-trip ticket with Air India for travel from Chicago, USA, to New Delhi and back to Chicago for USD 680. He departed from Chicago on February 3, 2022, and arrived in India on February 4, 2022, with his return journey initially scheduled for February 28, 2022.

Due to the prevailing COVID-19 situation and his health condition, he requested rescheduling of his return flight. Air India changed the date to June 7, 2022, and subsequently to June 19, 2022, after charging an additional USD 500.

The complainant later sought another change in the return date due to family circumstances and his responsibility towards his elderly parents in Chandigarh. He alleged that the airline failed to provide proper assistance and unilaterally cancelled his return ticket without prior intimation. He claimed that his grievance remained unresolved despite approaching Air India's Chandigarh office.

Consequently, he filed a consumer complaint seeking a refund of USD 1,180, along with interest, compensation for mental agony and harassment, and litigation expenses.

Contentions of Air India:

Air India denied cancelling the ticket, stating that it had been purchased through a travel agency, M/s Evia Travel Inc., Chicago, and that the complainant had repeatedly requested changes to his return journey. The airline contended that his last request was made on June 18, 2022, just one day before the scheduled flight, and could not be accommodated.

Air India further relied on the ticket status, which showed “Open For Use,” to argue that the ticket had not been cancelled. However, it acknowledged that the additional USD 500 charged for rescheduling was being processed for a refund to the original mode of payment, without deduction.

Observations and Decision:

The Commission found that the complainant had not produced documentary evidence establishing that Air India had unilaterally cancelled his ticket. Accordingly, it rejected his claim for a refund of the entire USD 1,180 on that ground.

The Commission held that Air India's failure to refund the admitted rescheduling amount of USD 500, equivalent to ₹31,440, despite its assurance, constituted deficiency in service. It partly allowed the complaint and directed the airline to refund ₹31,440 with 9% annual interest from September 18, 2023, the date of filing the complaint, and pay ₹10,000 as compensation for mental agony and harassment, including litigation expenses.

The Commission directed Air India to comply with the order within 45 days of receiving its certified copy. Failing compliance, the amounts specified in the order would carry interest at 12% per annum from the date of the order until realization