Returning from a family vacation in Kashmir, a Chhattisgarh judge was left behind at Delhi airport after Vistara Airlines allegedly denied him boarding despite a confirmed ticket, due to overbooking, while his family flew to Raipur without him. A consumer body in Chhattisgarh has held Vistara guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.A bench of president Prashant Kundu and member Anand Varghese directed the airline to pay Rs 1 lakh in compensation for mental, physical, and financial hardship, plus Rs 10,000 in litigation costs.“It was undisputed that, after being denied boarding on the airline’s flight, the complainant had to send his family alone from Delhi to Raipur while he was forced to remain in Delhi for an additional day,” the commission said on June 17.Noting that the ticket purchased by him on May 9, 2023, for Rs 7,204 was unilaterally resold by the airline on May 28, 2023, to another passenger for Rs 40,000, without informing him, the order noted that in this regard, the airline remained silent on why, despite the complainant holding a confirmed ticket, it failed to provide him with a seat on the flight. This gave rise to the inference that the airline may have resold the complainant’s confirmed seat at a higher price.The bench added that the documents and evidence on record also show that on the following day, i.e., May 29, 2023, the complainant himself booked an IndiGo flight ticket to travel. In these circumstances, the airline’s contention that no alternative flight was available and that it, therefore, refunded four times the ticket fare does not appear convincing.Also Read | Why even paid seats aren’t guaranteed: The lesson one passenger learned on a Pune-Bengaluru flight“This lends support to the complainant’s argument that if the airline refunded four times the ticket fare, his confirmed seat had likely been sold to another passenger at a higher price,” it held.Family boarded, judge left behindThe complainant, Bhupendra Kumar Vasnikar, an additional district judge in Chhattisgarh, booked four confirmed tickets for himself and his family to travel from Delhi to Raipur on a Vistara flight on May 28, 2023, while returning from a family vacation in Kashmir. Since there was no direct flight from Raipur to Srinagar, the itinerary included a layover in Delhi.Story continues below this ad Judge Bhupendra Kumar Vasnikar was travelling from Delhi to Raipur.The complainant further submitted that he had paid Rs 23,156 towards the fare for four confirmed tickets on a Vistara flight from Delhi to Raipur, scheduled for May 28, 2023.It was stated that after completing the family vacation, the complainant and his family returned to Delhi on May 25, 2023. On May 28, 2023, they reached Indira Gandhi International Airport, Delhi, at around 2 pm, nearly four hours before the scheduled departure of the Vistara flight to Raipur.Although they reported at the airline’s check-in counter well in advance and produced their tickets, the airline staff did not issue boarding passes to all four passengers. It was alleged that for nearly three hours, no explanation was given for the delay. Finally, when only about one hour remained before departure, the airline informed the complainant that boarding could not be provided to all four passengers. Instead, boarding passes would be issued only to three passengers, the complainant’s wife, daughter, and son, while the complainant himself would be denied boarding.Airline ‘resold ticket’, denied boardingThe complainant alleged that the airline, without assigning any valid reason, arbitrarily and unilaterally cancelled his confirmed ticket at the last moment and refused to allow him to board the flight. This came despite the airline having issued confirmed tickets for all four passengers and having collected the full ticket fare from the complainant on May 9, 2023.Story continues below this adThe complainant objected to the airline issuing boarding passes to only three passengers and requested that boarding passes be issued to all four passengers in accordance with their confirmed tickets. However, his request was not accepted, and as a result, one passenger, the complainant, was denied boarding.Also Read | Booked Sikkim tour package but got left at railway station, man wins Rs 30,000 payoutHe claimed that with little time left for boarding, the complainant had no option but to send his wife and children on the flight without him. Despite reaching the airport four hours early, Vistara denied him boarding, cancelled his confirmed ticket, arranged no alternative flight, and only refunded Rs 20,000 and Rs 7,000 to the travel agent.His wife and children flew to Raipur without him, while he had to stay back in Delhi overnight. He purchased a fresh IndiGo ticket for the next day for Rs 18,823 and incurred additional expenses on accommodation, food, and transport.The complaint further alleged that the ticket purchased by the complainant on May 9, 2023, for Rs 7,204, was unilaterally resold by the airline on May 28, 2023, to another passenger for Rs 40,000, without informing the complainant or obtaining his consent.Story continues below this adOverbooking an industry practice: AirlineThe airline contended that overbooking is a common practice in the aviation industry and is duly recognised by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to ensure that flights operate at full capacity.It was submitted that efforts were made to accommodate the complainant on an alternative flight, but all other flights were fully booked. Consequently, the airline was unable to arrange any alternative travel for him. It further stated that, in accordance with the applicable DGCA guidelines, it refunded 400 per cent of the ticket fare to the complainant. Therefore, the airline argued that it had not committed any illegality or deficiency in service.The airline also contended that the alleged incident occurred in May 2023, whereas the complainant filed the consumer complaint only in March 2025. According to the airline, this delay showed that the complaint had been filed after due deliberation and with the ulterior motive of tarnishing its reputation. It therefore argued that the complaint was baseless and liable to be dismissed.Refund not sufficient: OrderThough the airline had complied with the applicable guidelines and policies, the crucial question was why the complainant was denied boarding despite holding a confirmed ticket, the commission observed. Denial to board the flight with his family caused the complainant unnecessary physical, mental, and financial hardship, it noted.Story continues below this adAlso Read | Man claims ‘Lucky’ locket turns unlucky after he falls sick, loses business, wins Rs 10 lakhThe following day, the complainant booked an IndiGo flight to Raipur at his own expense. As a result, he had to incur expenses on accommodation, food and travel. Merely refunding four times the ticket fare was not sufficient compensation, the commission held, as denying boarding despite a confirmed ticket clearly amounted to an unfair trade practice.Accordingly, the complainant was held eligible to receive compensation from the airline. Holding Vistara guilty of deficiency in service, the forum directed the airline to pay Rs 1 lakh as compensation for physical, mental, and financial hardship, and Rs 10,000 as litigation costs within 45 days.TakeawayThe ruling underscores that compliance with DGCA overbooking guidelines does not absolve airlines of liability when passengers holding confirmed tickets are denied boarding. It affirms that refunding the prescribed compensation alone is insufficient if the passenger suffers avoidable hardship, and such conduct may amount to a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Chhattisgarh: 1800-233-3663) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.