An elderly couple from Navi Mumbai, Dr. Keshab Nandy and his wife Meenu Pandey Nandy, were unfairly charged Rs. 7,200 by Emirates Airlines for selecting premium adjacent seats on a Mumbai–New York flight in 2017.
The couple, citing medical needs, requested adjacent seating but were informed by the airline that only paid “preferred seats” could guarantee this.
On boarding, they discovered other passengers occupying similar adjacent seats without paying any additional fee, which led them to file a complaint with the consumer commission.
The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) confirmed the previous order of a district commission that Emirates Airlines had committed unfair trade practices.
The commission noted that the airline did not inform passengers about the availability of free adjacent seats and instead coerced them into paying for seat selection. The tribunal termed this as a "dark pattern,” a manipulative digital strategy employed to deceive consumers while making online purchases.
The SCDRC instructed the airline to refund Rs. 7,200 to the couple with interest from October 2017. The airline was also ordered to pay Rs. 5,000 as compensation for mental distress and Rs. 3,000 as litigation charges.
The commission made it clear that although airlines can charge for premium or extra-legroom seats, they have to indicate at least which seats are available without any cost and which seats attract an additional cost.
The ruling emphasizes increasing demands for airline booking system transparency. Passengers should be informed of free seating before being asked to pay for "preferred" seats, the commission said.
Withholding that information, it added, constitutes coercion and a breach of consumer protection legislation. This ruling provides a strong precedent for upholding fair play in air travel and online booking systems.
The case is a reminder to passengers to scrutinize seat-choice options before paying. Consumers need to verify if free seats are still left and ask for clarification if an airline insists that only paid seats can be reserved together. If one pays additional money under deceptive conditions, one can file a complaint with consumer forums.
The ruling can have a long-reaching effect on airline seat allocation and transparency in online booking. Analysts say airlines in India may now be compelled to make seat maps more transparent, distinguishing between free and paid seats.
The case also fits into international pressure on the so-called opaque airline pricing practices, such as fees for seats at a window without any actual window or secret service charges.
This historic ruling by the Maharashtra SCDRC enhances passengers' consumer rights and holds airlines accountable. It sends a strong message that false upselling practices and vagueness about seat allocation will not be tolerated.
It is an important development for Indian travelers, marking a step forward towards more equitable, transparent air travel experiences and a reminder to remain alert while making online reservations.