AI generated image used for representative purpose NEW DELHI: A Punjab district consumer commission has held IndiGo Airlines and Turkish Airlines guilty after a 65-year-old passenger with 55 percent disability was allegedly left without wheelchair assistance and proper facilities at Istanbul airport, where he had to wait about 24 hours before continuing his journey to London. His checked-in baggage was also delayed, causing him to miss his onward flight to Toronto.The commission, in its October 21 order, directed the two airlines to jointly pay Rs 50,000 as compensation and Rs 10,000 towards litigation expenses. Missed connecting flight, delayed baggage According to the commission’s order, the complainant, Kirpal Singh, a 65-year-old resident of Amritsar, booked an air ticket from Amritsar to London through a travel agency on March 27, 2024.The ticket, costing Rs 41,500, was for a journey scheduled for May 18, 2024, with connecting flights from Amritsar to Delhi, Delhi to Istanbul and Istanbul to London.Singh, who has a 55 percent disability, had requested wheelchair assistance for his journey. According to his complaint, the facility was provided at Amritsar and Delhi airports but was not available to him at Istanbul airport.The complainant alleged that after reaching Istanbul, he was separated from the passenger queue and was not allowed to board his connecting flight to London despite having a confirmed ticket and the necessary travel documents. He claimed that he was left at the airport for about 24 hours without proper accommodation, access to a lounge or wheelchair assistance. He also alleged that airline officials did not respond adequately when he approached them for an explanation.According to the order, Singh was subsequently given a fresh ticket for the Istanbul-London flight and reached London Heathrow airport on May 20, 2024. However, his checked-in baggage did not arrive with him.The baggage was delivered on May 22, according to the complaint and the baggage irregularities form issued by Turkish Airlines. The complainant had a confirmed onward flight from London to Toronto scheduled for the same day, which he said he could not board because he was waiting for his luggage.After returning to India, he approached the airlines seeking relief. He sent legal notices to both airlines on June 29, 2024. Turkish Airlines replied by email on July 2, stating that wheelchair assistance had not been allotted at Istanbul and asking him to contact IndiGo, according to the order.Singh alleged that he did not receive a satisfactory response from the airlines.He then approached the commission seeking Rs 1,32,052 towards the ticket amount, Rs 10 lakh as compensation for mental agony and harassment, and litigation expenses.IndiGo denied the allegations and claimed that its Delhi-Istanbul flight had been cancelled due to technical reasons beyond its control and that the passenger was informed about the cancellation. The airline also added that he was offered the option of a full refund or rescheduling without additional charges and that he chose to reschedule the journey.IndiGo also contended that wheelchair assistance had been provided at airports for the flights it operated, while the Istanbul-London flight was operated by Turkish Airlines. It said the checked-in baggage had been handed over to Turkish Airlines at Istanbul.Turkish Airlines did not appear before the commission to contest the complaint and was proceeded against ex parte in November 2024. Commission’s finding The bench comprising president Jagdishwar Kumar Chopra and member Mandeep Kaur examined the complaint, travel tickets, disability certificate, baggage irregularities form and other documents submitted by the parties.The commission noted that Singh was a senior citizen with 55 percent disability and that wheelchair assistance had been requested when the tickets were booked. It also observed that IndiGo had admitted that the original flight was cancelled and the journey was rescheduled.“Merely providing an option of rescheduling without additional charges does not absolve an airline of its obligation to provide appropriate assistance and reasonable care to a passenger, particularly one suffering from physical disability,” the commission noted.The bench also noted that the airlines had failed to satisfactorily explain why Singh could not board his intended connecting flight or establish that the necessary assistance and facilities had been provided during the waiting period at Istanbul.“The absence of wheelchair assistance and proper arrangements for a senior citizen suffering from disability amounts to a serious lapse in passenger care,” the commission said.It also considered the delayed delivery of the checked-in baggage, which was supported by the baggage irregularities form. The commission noted that IndiGo had acknowledged that the baggage reached Singh on May 22, while Turkish Airlines had failed to contest the allegations or rebut the documentary evidence.“Hence, this Commission is of the considered view that the failure to provide appropriate assistance to the complainant and the unexplained delay in his onward journey, coupled with the delayed delivery of baggage amounts to deficiency in service,” the bench concluded.The commission held both airlines jointly and severally liable, observing that they were involved in the connecting journey and were required to exercise particular care while dealing with a senior citizen with a substantial physical disability. Final order Partly allowing the complaint, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar, directed IndiGo Airlines and Turkish Airlines to: Pay Rs 50,000 as compensation for the harassment, mental agony and inconvenience suffered by Singh. Pay Rs 10,000 towards litigation expenses. The airlines have been directed to comply with the order within 45 days of receiving a copy of it. The order does not specify an additional interest rate for delayed payment.The commission declined to refund the ticket amount, noting that Singh had completed the journey, although a day later than planned. It held that he was entitled to compensation for the harassment and inconvenience caused during the journey.