STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CHANDIGARH FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/4/FA/260/2025 (Against the Order dated 1st April 2025 in Complaint No. DC/44/CC/982/2022 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chandigarh district commission)

WITH SC/4/IA/173/2025 (CONDONATION OF DELAY)

SOHIL BHASIN S/o. JANG BAHADUR PRESENT ADDRESS - C/O JANG BHADUR, R/O FLAT NO. C-11, UPPALS MARBLE ARCH, MANIMAJRA, CHANDIGARH, 160101CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus AIR INDIA THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR Through its PRESENT ADDRESS - SCO 162-164, SECTOR 34A, CHANDIGARH, 160022CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH.

ALHIND TOURS AND TRAVELS THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR Through its PRESENT ADDRESS - 2/16, SECOND FLOOR, WEST PATEL NAGAR, NEAR PATEL NAGAR METRO STATION, NEW DELHIWEST,DELHI.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI , PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. PREETINDER SINGH , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT:

DATED: 24/02/2026

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH

Appeal No.	:	260 of 2025
Date of Institution	:	04.09.2025
Date of Decision	:	24.02.2026

Sohil Bhasin son of Jang Bahadur aged about 55 years, Flat No. C-11, First Floor, Block C, Uppals Marble Arch, Manimajra, Chandigarh – 160101.

……Appellant/complainant V e r s u s

1. Air India Limited, through its Managing Director, SCO No. 162-164, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh – 160101. 2. Alhind Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd., through its Managing Director, having its office at 2/16, Second Floor, West Patel Nagar, Near Patel Nagar Metro Station, New Delhi.

..Respondents/opposite parties BEFORE: JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT.

MR.PREETINDER SINGH, MEMBER Present:-

Sh.Bawa Karanveer and Sh.Shivansh Sood, Advocates for the appellant.

Sh.Daksh Prem Azad, Advocate for the respondent no.1.

Sh.Afsal Yoosaf M.Y., Advocate for respondent no.2.

PER JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT The complainant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of the award already passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T., Chandigarh (in short the District Commission), vide order dated 01.04.2025 in consumer complaint bearing no.982 of 2022, whereby, while partly allowing it, opposite party no.2/respondent no.2 has been directed as under and complaint against opposite party no.1 was dismissed:-

i. To refund Rs.6,075/- (AED 270) to the complainant, being the difference of amount charged from him by OP No.2 for booking another air ticket, along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of the present consumer complaint i.e. 20.12.2022 till onwards.

ii. To pay an amount of Rs.30,000/- to the complainant, as compensation for mental agony and harassment to him.

iii. To pay Rs.35,000/- to the complainant, as cost of litigation.

This order shall be complied with by the OP No.2 within 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which, it shall make the payment of the amounts mentioned at Sr.No.(i) and (ii) above, with interest @12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr. No .(iii) above.

The complaint qua OP No.1 stands dismissed.”

2. Before the District Commission, it was the case of the complainant that he was approached by a firm namely Sky Bright LLC, Sharjah (U.A.E.) to provide consultancy services and was required to attend a meeting on 21.05.2022, for which he was to receive professional fees of AED 20,000. In order to reach Sharjah in time, he booked an air ticket dated 20.05.2022 from New Delhi to Sharjah on a flight operated by opposite party no.1 through opposite party no.2. The total ticket cost was AED 510. The complainant reached Delhi Airport well in time, but upon arrival, he came to know that the flight scheduled for 20.05.2022 had been cancelled. According to the record, no prior intimation of cancellation was given to him. He was thereafter compelled to purchase another ticket for 21.05.2022 by paying an additional amount of AED 270 after adju

Click Here to Read the rest of this document