Vistara Airlines has been directed by a Chhattisgarh consumer commission to pay ₹1 lakh in compensation to an Additional District Judge who was denied boarding on an overbooked flight, despite holding a confirmed ticket. The commission ruled that the airline's actions constituted both a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice, also awarding an additional ₹10,000 towards litigation costs.
Incident at Delhi Airport
The case involves Bhupendra Kumar Vasnikar, an Additional District Judge in Chhattisgarh, who was returning from a family vacation in Kashmir in May 2023. Judge Vasnikar had booked four confirmed Vistara tickets for his family's flight from Delhi to Raipur after a layover in the national capital.
According to the complaint, Vasnikar and his family arrived at Delhi's Indira Gandhi International Airport nearly four hours before their scheduled departure on May 28, 2023. Despite their timely arrival, airline staff reportedly delayed issuing boarding passes for an extended period. Eventually, the family was informed that only three members—Vasnikar's wife, son, and daughter—could board the flight, while the judge himself would be denied boarding due to overbooking. With no other immediate option, Vasnikar allowed his family to proceed to Raipur, leaving him stranded overnight in Delhi.
Financial and Personal Hardship
The following day, Judge Vasnikar was compelled to purchase a new IndiGo ticket costing ₹18,823 to return home. He also incurred additional expenses for accommodation, food, and local transport during his unexpected stay in Delhi.
Commission's Findings and Vistara's Defence
The Chhattisgarh consumer commission, comprising President Prashant Kundu and Member Anand Varghese, noted that Vistara failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for denying boarding to a passenger with a confirmed ticket. The commission observed that the complainant had to send his family alone and was forced to remain in Delhi for an extra day. Furthermore, the order highlighted an allegation that Vasnikar's original ticket, purchased for ₹7,204, might have been resold to another passenger for ₹40,000 without his knowledge, an accusation Vistara did not refute.
In its defence, Vistara argued that overbooking is a recognized practice within the aviation industry, permissible under Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) guidelines. The airline stated it attempted to arrange an alternative flight but none was available, and subsequently refunded four times the ticket fare as per DGCA norms.
Ruling on Compensation
However, the commission found Vistara's explanation unconvincing. It pointed out that Vasnikar successfully booked another flight the very next day at his own expense, contradicting the airline's claim of unavailability. The commission asserted that merely refunding four times the ticket fare was insufficient compensation, emphasizing that denying boarding to a confirmed passenger caused avoidable mental, physical, and financial hardship. The order, issued on July 17, 2026, directs Vistara to pay the compensation and litigation costs within 45 days.