NEW DELHI: A Delhi district commission has directed IndiGo to refund Rs 12,713 to a passenger who was denied boarding despite reaching the airport after the airline had delayed his flight, observing that the airline failed to provide evidence to support its claim that check-in had closed. The order was passed on August 31, 2026.Why IndiGo denied boarding to the passenger?According to the commission order, the passenger had booked an IndiGo flight from Delhi to Bengaluru scheduled for February 3, 2019. On the day of travel, the airline informed him that the flight had been delayed for operational reasons and its revised departure time was 4 pm.The passenger claimed that he reached the IndiGo counter at 2.45 pm and requested a boarding pass, but the airline staff refused to allow him to board, saying that he had not reached on time and all passengers had already checked in.He was then forced to book another flight at a cost of Rs 12,713. The complainant later approached IndiGo seeking a refund, but the airline refused to reimburse the amount.The airline, in its response, denied any deficiency in service and argued that the passenger had failed to follow the check-in timelines under its conditions of carriage.Why did the commission hold IndiGo responsible?The bench comprising President Divya Jyoti Jaipuriar and members Harpreet Kaur Charya and Ashwani Kumar Mehtа noted that IndiGo had not provided the check-in time of passengers in the list submitted with its reply. It therefore directed the airline to produce records including the passenger manifest showing the check-in time of all passengers, the boarding sheet with the closing time, system-generated records showing when check-in was closed and evidence showing when the passenger reported at the counter.The commission noted that the airline failed to produce these records despite being given an opportunity.“In absence of the above information, this Commission cannot verify as to whether all passengers had indeed checked in before the complainant arrived. If the check-in had actually been closed, the OP (InterGlobe Aviation Limited) could have easily produced CCTV footage or system logs. Their failure to do so proves that the complainant was arbitrarily denied boarding despite reporting on time for the revised flight. This clearly shows that the airline company has no evidence to refute the allegation made by the complainant and has tried to mislead this Commission with an obvious intention to hide its own deficiencies,” the commission held.The commission further held that denying check-in without justification after rescheduling the flight, coupled with the failure to produce relevant records, amounted to deficiency in service, negligence and unfair trade practice.“The act of denying check-in without justification, after rescheduling the flight, and then failing to produce relevant records amounts to gross deficiency in service, negligence and unfair trade practice under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act,” it further added.The commission also rejected the airline’s attempt to rely on its conditions of carriage and other provisions limiting its responsibility towards the passenger. It referred to a Supreme Court judgment which held that relief under the Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy.“In view of the above observations, we are of the considered view that the OP (InterGlobe Aviation Limited) has been deficient by denying check-in without justification to the complainant, ( who was travelling to join new assignment at the start of his career), after rescheduling the flight, and this conduct of OP has caused mental agony, inconvenience and harassment to the Complainant for which the OP is also liable to compensate him. It is well settled that the word ‘Compensation’ is of very wide connotation and once the Court is satisfied that the complainant has suffered harassment or mental agony and is entitled to compensation, it is obliged to adequately compensate him for the actual loss or expected loss, which would extend to compensation for the physical, mental or emotional sufferings,” the bench concluded.The commission allowed the complaint and directed InterGlobe Aviation to pay the passenger Rs 12,713 towards the cost of the flight ticket, along with 9 percent annual interest from April 20, 2019, until payment.It also awarded Rs 50,000 as compensation for mental agony, inconvenience and harassment, and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs.The airline was given 30 days to make the payment. If it failed to pay within that period, the entire awarded amount would carry interest at 12 percent per annum from the expiry of the 30-day period.
