COMPENSATION ON FLIGHTS DELAYED FOR LONG HOURS AND THEN

CANCELLED

DELAYS
If the flight is delayed for less than 24 hours then the flier is entitled for meals and
refreshment at the airport.
If the flight is delayed for than 24 hours then the flier is entitled for hotel
accommodation with transfers.
Provided the following conditions:
 Airline has no obligation to compensate, if the delay is caused due to
extraordinary circumstances.
 Operating airline shall have absolute discretion in selection of hotels under the
given circumstances.
 If you have checked-in on time, and the airline expects a delay beyond its
original announced scheduled time of departure or a revised time of departure,
you are entitled to facilities in accordance with CAR, Section 3, Series M, Part
IV.
CANCELLATION
To what extent flier is entitled for compensation:
 Airline is required to refund the ticket in case the flier is not willing to travel on
its alternate or the subsequent flight or on another airline’s flight.
 Refund will be processed by the airline in accordance with CAR Section 3,
Series M, Part II.
 Airline is bound to provide alternate travel opportunities at no additional cost,
if the flier so desire.
 If the flier has already reported at the airport to undertake journey on original
flight and waiting for the alternate flight, airline is bound to provide meals and
refreshments.
FORCE MAJEURE CIRCUMSTANCES
Airline will not be liable for compensation on account of cancellations and delays
caused due to extraordinary circumstance(s) beyond the control of the airline, such as:

 Natural disaster
 Civil war
  Political instability
 Security risks
 Insurrection or riot, flood, explosion, etc.
 Government regulation or order affecting the aircraft.
 Strikes and labour disputes causing cessation
 Meteorological conditions
 Cancellations and delays clearly attributable to Air Traffic Control (ATC)
 Slowdown or interruption of work or any other causes that are beyond the
control of the airline but which affect their ability to operate flights on schedule

DENIED BOARDING
To reduce the possibility of flight departing with empty seats, airlines generally
overbook flights to a limited extent. In case of overbooking on a particular flight, there
may be circumstances on a particular day when more passengers report for the flight
than the number of seats available. Under such conditions, airline may deny boarding
to a passenger while he may be holding confirmed bookings for travel on the flight and
reported for the flight well within the specified time ahead of the departure of the flight.
In that case, if he voluntarily vacates his seat then the airline, at its own discretion,
would offer him such benefits/ facilities which it may wish to confer on him.
However, if he has to vacate his seat against his wish airline is liable to pay you
monetary compensation in accordance with the provisions of CAR, Section 3, Series
M, Part IV. If the cost of the ticket is less than the amount of compensation contained
in CAR Section 3, Series M, Party IV, passenger/flier will be entitled to an amount
equivalent to the ticket cost in addition to refund of air ticket.
CASE LAWS
National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Air India Ltd. vs M.K. Abdul Majeed on 26 September, 2003
Equivalent citations: IV (2003) CPJ 144 NC
Bench: K G Member, R Rao, B Taimni
Facts
The Respondent/Original Complainant a retired Deputy Director of the Vikram
Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvananthapuram had to attend a conference of Space
Engineers at Agra scheduled for 8.00 a.m. on 8.4.1999. He booked a ticket in the Air
India flight scheduled to take off at 8.40 a.m. on 7.4.1999 from Thiruvanthapuram to
Mumbai from where he had to catch a flight to Delhi for his onward journey to Agra.
He was given a Boarding Pass and he along with other passengers boarded the flight at
8.00 a.m. on 7.4.1999. But after 3 hours at about 11.00 a.m. the Airport Authorities
announced that the flight is cancelled.
Thereafter he himself had to make alternate arrangements, contacting a travel agent and
immediately managed to get a ticket to Delhi in the Indian Airlines flight scheduled to
take off at 5.20 p.m. on 7.4.1999. He reached Delhi at 11.45 p.m. As Agra is 250 kms.
Away and he had to reach at 8.00 a.m. on the next day, he had no other alternative but
to take a taxi in the midnight and travel through unfamiliar territory undergoing
tremendous amount of stress.
His complaint before the District Forum was allowed and he was awarded
compensation of Rs. 20,000/- with interest; Rs. 1300/- as taxi charges and also costs of
litigation. When the matter was challenged before the State Commission, explanation
given by Air India is that the flight has to be cancelled because of unexpected
circumstances. The unexpected circumstances are that the pilot operating the flight
from Dubai to Thiruvanthapuram is the one who is required to operate the flight from
Thiruvanthapuram to Mumbai. Since the flight from Dubai itself came late, his services
could not be secured and therefore the flight had to be cancelled.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission observed that the exact reasons as
to why the flight was not operated would only be known to Air India, but it is reasonable
to assume that when the incoming flight from Dubai is delayed, they should have made
some alterative arrangements to get another Pilot to operate the flight to Mumbai. Just
leaving the passengers to heir own resources and destiny is nothing but callous approach
and gross negligence signifying a total unconcern to passengers woes. It held that the
order of the State Commission is perfectly correct and there is no reason for to exercise
its Revisional Jurisdiction vested under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act to
interfere. The Revision Petition is dismissed.

Go Airlines(India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Yogesh Kumar

FACTS
The appellant, GO (Airlines) Pvt Ltd, failed to inform the respondent about the
cancellation of flight, thus appellant has been vide impugned order dated 18.07.2007
directed to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards the extra expenditure involved in the
alternative flight and compensation for mental and physical harassment and discomfort
the respondent suffered and Rs. 2,000/- towards the cost of litigation. Feeling aggrieved
the appellant has preferred an appeal to the State Commission.
The plea is being taken that the respondent procured the ticket from the agent with a
confirmed status and since the agent was informed about the cancellation of flight, it
was the duty of the agent to inform the respondent about it and the liability, if any, was
that of the agent and further that the amount of the ticket was refunded after deducting
Rs.600/- and moreover the agent was a necessary party and in its absence the impugned
order is illegal.
The State Commission observed that every airlines is supposed to inform about the
cancellation of the flight or delay well in time to each and every consumer or the ticket
holder either through telephone or some other process and if it chooses to give
information through its agent, it has to suffer for the acts of omission and commission
or lapses on the part of its agents. It is the airlines who receives the consideration and
agent only receives some commission and therefore the direct contract is with the
airlines who receives the consideration and as such agent is not a necessary party. It is
the airlines which is ultimately going to refund the cost and to pay the compensation if
it is found to be guilty for deficiency in service. However, airlines has an independent
remedy against their agents for latter’s negligence. Thus the appeal was dismissed.

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission(Delhi) in Austrian Airlines, vs

Rakshita Bhargava, observed that Airlines cannot be held liable if the delay or
cancellation is by act of nature such as bad weather, bird hit, poor visibility, tyre-
puncture etc. which is beyond the human control, however, the plea for delay in flight
due to technical snag itself reflects the deficiency in service on the part of the Airlines
because of their not-so-perfect maintenance of the fleet by staff. For their own acts of
omission and commission, the consumer cannot be allowed to suffer.
Interests of the consumer are paramount and have to be protected at every cost. This is
what was enshrined way back in the year 1985 by the United Nations General Assembly
through its resolution of 9th April, 1985 that the consumer particularly of developing
countries have to be protected from the exploitation of the service providers and
therefore it was pursuant to this resolution that Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was
brought on the statute book by the Parliament of India.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission: Delhi
Austrian Airlines, vs Rakshita Bhargava, on 10 January, 2008
FACTS
Respondent purchased a business class ticket for the sector Delhi-Vienna-Stuttgart-
Paris-Vienna-Delhi on the airlines of appellant for travel on 26th June, 2004. The flight
was delayed for 10 hours from Stuttgart-Vienna on 26.6.2004. The appellant failed to
provide overnight hotel accommodation and transfer to airport and respondent was
forced to bear all expenses. The scheduled departure time was 1.50 AM. Due to change
in departure and arrival timings the respondent was further made to suffer on account
of down grading of the business class ticket to economy class on the sector of Vienna
to Delhi on 11.7.2004. The boarding pass of the respondent was snatched and she was
subjected to rude and offensive treatment by the Supervisor of the appellant-Airlines.
Respondent suffered high fever and stress and sought compensation for deficiency of
service and harassment.
On account of having downgraded the business class ticket to economy class ticket and
also having delayed the flight by 10 hours, the appellant has been directed to pay
compensation of Rs. 1.00 lakh and Rs. 10,000/- towards cost of litigation. Feeling
aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal under section 15 of the Consumer
Protection Act.
OBSERVATION
The conduct of the appellant company was abominable firstly by down-grading the
category and then making the consumer suffer mental agony, harassment in delaying
the flight by 10 hours without any reason. Airlines cannot escape from their liability to
compensate the consumer on account of inordinately long delay in flight without any
valid and convincing reasons and on stereo-type plea of technical snag.
Rule no. 3 of International Carriers Rules governing the schedule of flight prescribes
that unless there are valid reasons, the concerned Airlines shall be liable for delay or
cancellation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has in Ghaziabad Development Authority v.
Balbir Singh (1994) 65 SCC has provided vide connotation to the word Compensation
by including in its fold element of actual loss, mental agony, harassment , physical
discomfort , emotional suffering and injustice.
The word compensation is of a very wide connotation. It may constitute actual loss or
expected loss and may extend to compensation for physical, mental or even emotional
suffering, insult or injury or loss. The provisions of the Consumer Protection Act enable
a consumer to claim and empower the Commission to redress any injustice done. The
Commission or the Forum is entitled to award not only value of goods or services but
also to compensate a consumer for injustice suffered by him. The Commission/ Forum
must determine that such sufferance is due to malafide or capricious or oppressive act.
DECISION
The compensation awarded by the District Forum is reasonable and does not call for
interference. Appeal was dismissed being wholly devoid of and adequate. Payment
shall be made within one month after receipt of the order.