Air India Express must pay ₹27,000 over bicycle handling

Air India Express has been directed to pay ₹27,000 to a passenger after a consumer commission found that his racing bicycle was placed on a regular baggage conveyor despite a separate fee for special equipment handling.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Dakshina Kannada held that the airline had failed to provide the level of care it had undertaken to offer after collecting ₹2,000 from passenger Sushanth N. G. for special handling. The order, passed on August 31, directed the carrier to refund that fee and pay additional compensation and legal costs.

The commission awarded ₹20,000 for deficiency in service, mental agony and inconvenience, along with ₹5,000 towards litigation expenses. It gave the airline 45 days to comply, failing which the amount will carry interest at 6 per cent a year from the date of default until payment.

Sushanth had booked an Air India Express flight from Chennai to Mangalore for July 27, 2025. He was travelling with a bicycle used for training and competitive racing, which he valued at more than ₹3 lakh. At the time of booking, he paid ₹2,000 for one-piece special equipment handling.

He told the commission that airline staff at Chennai airport had assured him the bicycle would receive special care. After reaching Mangalore, however, he found the bicycle circulating on the ordinary baggage carousel along with other passengers’ luggage.

Sushanth questioned airline staff at the airport and later raised the issue by email on July 31, 2025, seeking a refund of the special handling charge. The airline initially told him the matter was being examined but subsequently closed the complaint, prompting him to approach the consumer forum.

Air India Express acknowledged that the special handling fee had been collected but disputed the passenger’s interpretation of the service. It argued that payment for special equipment did not mean the bicycle had to be manually carried at every stage of the journey.

The airline maintained that special handling involved additional attention and protection where operationally required and permissible. It also contended that baggage within allowed belt dimensions could be delivered through the normal arrival carousel and that the bicycle fell within those limits.

The carrier further submitted that staff had noticed the bicycle on the conveyor and removed it by hand, limiting its exposure to contact with other baggage. It stressed that the bicycle had reached Sushanth without physical damage, wear, tear or loss.

The commission rejected the argument that absence of damage was sufficient to defeat the complaint. It examined documents produced by both sides, including the airline’s terms governing special equipment handling, photographs, email correspondence and video footage showing the bicycle on the baggage belt.

The bench, comprising President-in-charge Somashekarappa K. Handigol and member Sharadamma H. G., found that the footage was inconsistent with the standard of special care promised for the paid service. It held that a passenger who pays an additional charge for handling delicate or valuable equipment is entitled to expect treatment different from ordinary baggage processing.

The commission said the airline’s own service terms contemplated care and caution in dealing with special equipment. By placing the bicycle on the regular belt despite accepting the additional handling fee, it found Air India Express had failed to perform the service in the manner promised.

The panel therefore treated the conduct as a deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, and also found that the handling arrangement had not been honoured as represented to the passenger.

Sushanth had sought refund of the ₹2,000 fee, ₹40,000 as compensation for mental agony and ₹10,000 towards litigation expenses. The commission partly allowed the complaint, awarding a lower compensation amount while granting the full refund and litigation costs.

The ruling turned on the distinction between successful delivery and fulfilment of a paid service commitment. Although the bicycle arrived intact, the commission found that its placement on the ordinary baggage system showed that the special handling Sushanth had purchased was not provided as agreed.



Notice an issue?

Arabian Post strives to deliver the most accurate and reliable information to its readers. If you believe you have identified an error or inconsistency in this article, please don't hesitate to contact our editorial team at editor[at]thearabianpost[dot]com. We are committed to promptly addressing any concerns and ensuring the highest level of journalistic integrity.


Loading next story…