Kingfisher fined for 'duping' flyers to take low-cost flight

MUMBAI: The problems don’t seem to be ending for Vijay Mallya. Sending a strong signal to all airlines, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on Thursday ordered the defunct Kingfisher Airlines to deposit Rs 25 lakh in the Consumer Welfare Fund of the Government of India as fine for making fliers take the low-cost airline, Deccan, after taking payments for the premier-service airline (Kingfisher).
The order follows a complaint filed by a Delhi lawyer, J K Mittal, and an NGO, Consumer Voice, in 2008. “We also direct that one copy each of this order be sent to the Director General, Civil Aviation, and the Secretary to Government of India, Department of Civil Aviation, to consider taking adequate steps to ensure that such unfair means and practices are not adopted by other airlines operating from India,” the commission said.
While asking the airline to pay the lump sum amount, the commission said, “Though, we do not know as to how many tickets of the flights operated by airline in the aforesaid manner, it cannot be disputed that the number of such tickets must be very large. Though, it is not known how much amount it collected from the fliers in the aforesaid manner, it can be safely said it has to be (a) huge amount.”
The commission said that the fliers who made the booking through the agents and the airline’s website were made to believe that they will get the services, including facilities and amenities, which a premier airlines provides on its flights. “It is on account of the aforesaid belief generated in their minds due to the misleading statements contained on the tickets, that they pay a price higher than the price charged by a low-cost airline. Not only there is failure on the part of airline to disclose the material facts to the flier, the statements contained in the tickets are misleading and the impression given to him is false. We therefore, hold that Kingfisher Airlines had adopted unfair means and practices, while selling tickets of the flights operated by Deccan Airlines from its website,” the commission observed while finding the airline guilty under the Consumer Protection Act.
In the complaint, Mittal cited his own experience. He had booked a Delhi to Bhubaneswar return flight for March 12, 2008 on the website of Kingfisher Airlines. When Mittal reached the airport, he was told that the airline did not operate any flight from Delhi to Bhubaneswar and he was directed to take the low-cost airline flight. On return from Bhubaneswar to Delhi, Mittal was once again issued a boarding pass for the low-cost airline despite the fact that his booked ticket had cited a Kingfisher Airline flight.
The airlines claimed that as part of its business endeavour, Kingfisher Airlines offered the facility of booking certain flights operated by Deccan Airlines, for the routes on which it did not operate. The airlines further claimed that it made explicitly clear at the time of booking that the flight would be operated by Deccan Airlines. As regards to the flight fare, it stated that the price of the ticket is related to the time when the booking is made.