##PAGE1##

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

CHANDIGARH DISTRICT COMMISSION

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. DC/44/CC/345/2024

VEERENDRA KUMAR MEENA

PRESENT ADDRESS - s/o Nath Mal Verma r/o HOUSE NO 1020 SECTOR 24B

CHANDIGARH.CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH.

KRISHNA MEENA

PRESENT ADDRESS - w/o Veerendra Kumar Meena r/o HOUSE NO 1020 SECTOR 24B

CHANDIGARH.CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH.

HRIDHAAN MEENA

PRESENT ADDRESS - s/o Veerendra Kumar Meena r/o HOUSE NO 1020 SECTOR 24B

CHANDIGARH (Minor) through his father Veerendra Kumar Meena s/o Nath Mal Verma r/o H.No.

1020 Sector 24B Chandigarh.CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH.

.......Complainant(s)

Versus

AIR INDIA EXPRESS LIMITED

PRESENT ADDRESS - Block-4, VATIKA ONE ON ONE SECTOR 16 NH-48 INDUSTRIAL

ESTATE e (GURGAON), Industrial Estate, Gurgaon, HARYANA through its Managing

Director.CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH.

.......Opposite Party(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE PAWANJIT SINGH , PRESIDENT

HON'BLE MR. S.K. SARDANA , MEMBER

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:

RANA GURTEJ SINGH (Advocate)

DATED: 04/05/2026

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

Consumer Complaint : CC/345/2024

No.

Date of Institution : 22/7/2024

Date of Decision : 4/5/2026

1. Veerendra Kumar Meena aged about 58 years son of Nath Mal Verma resident of House

No 1020 Sector 24B Chandigarh.

2. Krishna Meena aged about 47 years wife of Veerendra Kumar Meena resident of House

No 1020 Sector 24B Chandigarh.

3. Hridhaan Meena aged about 16 years son of Veerendra Kumar Meena resident of House

No 1020 Sector 24B Chandigarh (Minor) through his father Veerendra Kumar Meena aged

about 58 years son of Nath Mal Verma resident of House No 1020 Sector 24B Chandigarh

...Complainants

Versus

1.Air India Express Limited Block-4, Vatika One-on-one Sector-16, NH-48 Industrial Estat e

(Gurgaon), Industrial Estate, Gurgaon, Haryana through its Managing Director

2. Vidhata Consultancy having office at Shop No.1, Phase 2, Kutia Rd, New Rasila Nagar,

Jalandhar, Punjab 144002.

...Opposite Parties

CORAM : SHRI PAWANJIT SINGH PRESIDENT

SHRI SURESH KUMAR SARDANA MEMBER

ARGUED BY : Sh. Sahil Jain, Advocate for Sh. Rana Gurtej Singh,

Advocate for complainant

: Sh. Daksh Prem Azad, Advocate for OP No.1 (through VC)

OP No.2 already exparte.

Per Pawanjit Singh, President

1. The present consumer complaint has been filed by the complainant against the

opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as the OP). The brief facts of the case are as

under :-

(a) It transpires from the averments as projected in the

consumer complaint that the complainant No.1 is a

respected Indian Administrative Service Officer and he

along with his wife and 16-year-old son had planned a

vacation to Dubai from 9th June 2024 to 17th June 2024.

The return journey from Dubai to Amritsar was booked via

the Opposite Party Air India Express Airline through a

travel agent at a cost of 18,420/- per person having flight

number IX 192 from Dubai International Airport to

Amritsar International Airport. The copy of the invoice

issued by the travel agent is attached herewith as Exhibit

C1. The copy of the E- Ticket issued by the Opposite Party

is attached herewith as Exhibit C-2. The scheduled

departure time of the flight IX 192 was 0850 Hours on 17th

June 2024, and the boarding was to commence at 0750

Hours. The complainants reached Dubai International

Airport two and a half hours prior to the departure time and

completed all check-in formalities, including receiving

their boarding passes and checking in their luggage. The

boarding passes were also issued to the Complainants. It

was mentioned that the boarding gates would close at 0825

Hours being 25 minutes before the scheduled departure

time, i.e. 0850 Hours. The copy of the boarding passes

issued to the Complainants are annexed as Exhibit C-3

(Colly). After check-in, the Complainants crossed the

security check and reached the designated gate of

departure. The complainants reached the boarding gate well

before 0825 Hours. Upon reaching the boarding gate before

0825 Hours, the ground staff of the Opposite Party refused

t