Prateek Tanmay
4 min readNew DelhiJun 12, 2026 08:30 AM IST
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Puducherry, has directed IndiGo Airlines to pay Rs 1 lakh compensation and Rs 20,000 litigation costs to an elderly couple after finding the airline guilty of deficiency in service over a nearly six-hour delayed flight.
A bench of S Mouttouvel (president) and members A S Suvitha and G Arumugam noted that the passengers were compelled to remain seated inside the aircraft for prolonged hours at Lucknow and Delhi amid uncertainty, anxiety and absence of proper communication or assistance from the airline authorities.
“The obligation of an airline extends beyond mere transportation from one destination to another and includes timely dissemination of information, effective coordination during contingencies, and ensuring reasonable comfort and dignity to passengers,” the commission noted in its order dated May 15.
Flight delayed
- The complaints alleged that the senior citizen couple had booked tickets from Dehradun to Chennai through a travel agency for July 2, 2023.
- According to the couple, their return journey turned into a distressing experience after the IndiGo flight, scheduled to depart Dehradun at 4.45 pm and reach Chennai at 9 pm via Lucknow, was delayed, diverted and ultimately reached Chennai only around 3 am the next day.
- It was alleged that the flight left Dehradun nearly two hours behind schedule and remained in Lucknow for more than an hour.
- After passengers had boarded and the aircraft doors were closed, the pilot reportedly announced that the flight could not proceed to Chennai because the crew’s permissible flying hours would expire before arrival.
- The aircraft was then diverted to Delhi for a crew change.
- The couple claimed that the passengers were forced to remain seated in the aircraft amid uncertainty and confusion, without adequate information or assistance from the airline.
- They said the prolonged ordeal caused them severe physical discomfort, leg cramps, exhaustion and mental trauma, particularly given their advanced age.
- In its defence, IndiGo contended that the delay was caused by maintenance requirements and subsequent crew flying-time limitations.
- The airline also claimed that passengers had been offered alternatives such as taking another flight, cancelling the booking for a full refund or continuing with the delayed flight.
‘No evidence submitted’
The commission, however, found that IndiGo had failed to substantiate its claim of unavoidable operational exigencies.
“Except making bald assertions in their written submissions, no material whatsoever has been placed before this Commission to establish the precise nature of the alleged maintenance defect, the urgency necessitating such maintenance, or the circumstances under which the disruption became inevitable,” the commission observed.
It noted that while the airline cited maintenance issues, it produced no maintenance logs, technical reports, inspection records or other documentary evidence to support its explanation.
The commission held that the conduct of Indigo Airlines in subjecting the complainants to prolonged confinement inside the aircraft without proper communication, timely updates or meaningful assistance, amounted to a deficiency in service.
Story continues below this ad
The commission, however, rejected the complainant’s allegations of unfair trade practice on the ground that it had made false claims that alternative options had been offered to the passengers.
“Except the oral assertion of the Complainants, no independent evidence has been produced to conclusively establish deliberate deception, false representation or unfair method adopted by the Opposite Parties so as to attract the ingredients of ‘unfair trade practice’,” the commission held.
Airline directed to pay Rs 1 lakh
The commission directed IndiGo Airlines to pay a sum of Rs 1 lakh to the complainants as compensation for deficiency in service and also for the mental agony, physical hardships and other sufferings sustained by the complainants.
It further ordered to pay Rs 20,000 towards litigation expenses within 30 days.
