Kerala consumer court orders Air Asia to refund fare for cancelled flight, pay ₹10k compensation

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) at Thrissur has held Air Asia (India) Limited liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for failing to provide an immediate refund to a passenger after cancelling a flight citing operational reasons [Yadavu PB v Air Asia].

The Commission observed that it is a settled law that when an airline cancels a flight, it has to automatically refund the full ticket amount unless the passenger voluntarily opts for an alternative arrangement.

"The evidence on record A4 clearly shows that the opposite party cancelled the flight for its own operational reasons. It is settled law that when a flight is cancelled by the airline, the passenger is entitled to an immediate refund of the entire ticket cost unless he voluntarily opts for an alternate arrangement. The complainant made several attempts to obtain the refund through the method prescribed by the opposite party but the system repeatedly failed. This, coupled with the opposite party's silence despite reminders and notice, establishes gross negligence," the Court observed.

The order was delivered on November 27, 2025 by a Bench comprising President CT Sabu along with members Sreeja S and Ram Mohan R.

The consumer forum has ordered the airline to refund the ticket fare of ₹2,983 along with interest, pay a compensation of ₹10,000 for mental agony and harassment to the complainant/ passenger and also pay ₹2,500 towards litigation costs.

According to the complaint, the passenger had booked an Air Asia flight from Bangalore to Kochi, which was later cancelled by the airline citing operational reasons.

While the airline acknowledged the cancellation, it did not process an immediate refund of the ticket amount. Even after the complainant requested a refund multiple times through the airline's customer support channels, there was no response whatsoever.

Despite multiple follow-ups, the refund was not credited, prompting the consumer to file a complaint before the district consumer commission, alleging a deficiency in service and negligence by the airlines.

Air Asia did not appear before the commission.

After analysing the complainant's submissions, the commission criticised Air Asia's refund mechanism, which was projected as consumer-friendly but failed to deliver in practice. It noted that the airline's inaction had forced the complainant to seek legal recourse for a meagre amount, causing him inconvenience and distress.

The commission added that service providers such as airlines, which cater to a large number of consumers daily, are expected to improve customer friendly mechanisms in order to act promptly in matters involving cancellations and refunds.

The commission concluded that Air Asia's conduct in this case reflected a deficiency in service and ordered the airline to refund the ticket amount with interest, pay compensation and litigation costs, to the complainant.

Advocate Peter Davis M appeared for the complainant/ passenger.

[Read Order]