IndiGo crisis: DGCA compensation minimum relief, passengers can claim more, says Delhi consumer body president Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal

Passengers have right to refund or re-routing, right to meals, refreshments and hotel stay and right to monetary compensation which includes full refund or alternative flight at no additional cost for cancellations announced more than 24 hours prior to departure, the passenger may choose. If within 24 hours of departure, the airline must also arrange meals and accommodation if required.

These rights ensure that immediate disruptions do not translate into complete logistical, financial, or health distress to passengers.

Can passengers claim compensation for additional losses?

Sehgal: DGCA compensation is minimum statutory relief. It does not bar passengers from seeking further compensation where financial losses are proven (missed business deals, non-refundable bookings, hotel losses), emotional distress, harassment, or mental agony is established and if there is demonstrable deficiency in service.

Consumer fora has repeatedly recognised that statutory relief does not eliminate higher compensation claims. Case examples include Kingfisher Airlines Ltd. v. Praveen Kumar (2014) in which mental harassment and financial loss was compensated. Another example is Jet Airways v. Inderjeet Singh (2017) – additional damages awarded for missed connecting flights.

Thus, the principle is well-settled — DGCA compensation = Floor, Not Ceiling.

How does the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, apply to cases of flight cancellations and delays?

Sehgal: The aviation service squarely falls under the definition of “service” under Section 2(42) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Hence, passengers are consumers and are entitled to seek redressal on grounds of deficiency of service, unfair trade practice, overcharging, unreasonable delays, negligence.

Do you think IndiGo’s response to the crisis, including offering refunds and hotel accommodations to consumers, is sufficient?

Sehgal: IndiGo took some steps to mitigate the crisis including ticket refunds, alternate flight arrangements and hotel accommodations for stranded passengers. While these actions align with baseline regulatory requirements, they do not sufficiently mitigate consequential losses suffered by passengers.

Shortcomings such as inadequate communication, long waiting lines at airports, difficulty contacting customer service, lack of uniform compensation processing and no transparent policy for consequential losses have come to light plaguing the passengers. This has caused severe distress and suffering to them.

What more can IndiGo do to support affected passengers?

Sehgal: There can be more systemic reforms implemented to avoid such a crisis in future. Incorporation of a ‘National Air Passenger Rights Charter’ with statutory backing to avoid such a crisis in future.

To align with best global practices and consumer expectations, IndiGo can implement enhanced transparency like real-time notifications through SMS, WhatsApp, email, public disclosure of reason behind cancellation, support for consequential losses by document-based reimbursement (for hotel bookings, connecting flight loss, etc.), credit vouchers with extended validity, corporate travel loss settlement process, crisis management readiness by having reserve aircraft and crew pools, dedicated airport help desks and priority elderly/disabled assistance to help those in need.

A dedicated compensation portal to prevent consumer’s ordeal of chasing helplines, post-incident redressal committees can be formed to decide internal dispute resolution without litigation.

Since you are at the helm of affairs as the president of the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, how do you think National, state and district level forums have fared when it comes to protecting consumer rights?

Sehgal: As the President of the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, and having previously served as a Judge of the Delhi High Court, I can say with confidence that the three-tier consumer dispute redressal mechanism envisioned under the Consumer Protection Act has, over the years, played a pivotal role in strengthening and safeguarding consumer rights across the country.

The National Commission, the state commissions, and the district commissions together form a unique judicial framework that is both accessible and consumer-centric. Each level has contributed meaningfully. Overall, the consumer fora has fared well in advancing consumer rights, especially considering the increasing complexity of modern commerce.

What is the current pendency of the consumer forums in Delhi and India? The Commission faces staffing and infrastructure challenges. How are these issues being addressed, and what impact do they have on the disposal of cases?

Sehgal: Across the country, consumer forums have handled over 29 lakh cases since inception, of which about 23.7 lakh have been disposed of. Presently, close to 5.4–5.5 lakh matters remain pending nationwide. The trend in 2025 shows filings rising faster than disposals, contributing to pendency. Delhi broadly reflects these national patterns. A major cause of delay is staffing and infrastructure deficiency.

Many state and district commissions across India are functioning without full composition. Inadequate courtrooms, shortage of administrative staff, weak digital infrastructure and frequent adjournments all slow down disposal. These challenges directly undermine the primary objective of consumer fora — speedy and affordable justice.

The Consumer Protection Act, 2019, removed healthcare services from its purview. How does this impact consumers, and what recourse do they have in cases of medical negligence?

Sehgal: There is a misconception that the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 excludes healthcare services merely because medical services are no longer specifically mentioned in Section 2(42). However, the definition of “service” retains the expression “but not limited to”, making the list illustrative rather than exhaustive. Importantly, there is no express exclusion of medical services in the Act, and therefore medical negligence claims may still be brought before Consumer Fora.

The legal position continues to evolve. Recently, in Bar of Indian Lawyers Vs DK Gandhi, the Supreme Court ruled that legal services do not fall within the ambit of the Act. While doing so, the Court applied similar reasoning to question the earlier decision in Indian Medical Association Vs VP Shantha, which held that medical professionals come within the scope of consumer law, and has sought a reconsideration of that position.

This development has reignited meaningful discussion on whether the consumer framework is the most suitable mechanism for adjudicating medical negligence claims.

Now the question is why does the apex court not exempt medical profession from the purview of CPA?

Sehgal: The court held that a doctor owes certain duties to their patients – duties of care in deciding whether to treat the patient, what treatment to give, and how the treatment is administered. If the doctor does not exercise a “reasonable degree of care” and breaches one of these duties, they can be liable for deficiency in service under the CPA.  Unless these structural constraints are addressed, pendency will persist, affecting public confidence in the system.

Commissions often face challenges in executing orders. What steps are being taken to address this issue and ensure justice for consumers?

Sehgal: In case of non-compliance, the commission can order attachment and sale of the property of the defaulter, or even impose penalties (including imprisonment in extreme cases) under the enforcement provisions.

However, despite the statutory strength, in practice, execution of consumer-forum orders often falls short. Some of the key structural and systemic challenges.

Many commissions — especially at state and district levels — suffer from vacancies in leadership, lack of administrative staff, poor infrastructure and weak record-management facilities. This hampers prompt follow-through on execution and complicates logistical steps like property attachment or issuing warrants.

There is often no dedicated enforcement cell attached to the forums. As a result, when a party defaults, the burden on the complainant increases — they may have to file separate “Execution Applications” or coordinate with civil machinery to effect orders.

What message would you like to convey to consumers and young lawyers aspiring to join the judiciary, particularly women?

Sehgal: Leading the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, and having served earlier in the judiciary, I would like to convey a simple but powerful message.

To our consumers, I would like to say stay informed, stay vigilant, and never hesitate to assert your rights. The law exists to protect you, irrespective of your economic or social standing. When you choose to stand up for your rights, you strengthen the entire ecosystem of justice.

To the young lawyers and law students aspiring to join the Bench, particularly women, I want to see them not just as participants, but as future leaders of the justice system.

The judiciary needs balanced perspectives — and women bring empathy, patience, emotional intelligence, and courage to the institutional fabric. Do not underestimate your voice, and do not wait for permission to lead. Prepare yourselves, work with integrity, embrace hard challenges, and believe firmly that the Bench is not beyond your reach.

I say this with humility and experience. The doors to the justice system are open and it is time more women walk through them with confidence, conviction, and purpose.