Copyright indiatimes
Dr. Nandy and his wife from Navi Mumbai bought airline tickets to fly from Mumbai to New York and back. Their trip from Mumbai to New York included a stop in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE) on August 26, 2017. They were to return on September 15, 2017. Income Tax GuideIncome Tax Slabs FY 2025-26Income Tax Calculator 2025New Income Tax Bill 2025They found out that there were only a few seats left and some seats were already crossed out by the airline. Dr. Nandy has diabetes and high blood pressure, so he needed his wife’s help with his medications and diet. Because of this, they needed seats next to each other. When they reached out to the airline, they got the impression that only a few free seats were available, which would be assigned within 48 hours before the flight. However, the airline wasn’t sure if they would get convenient seats among the free ones. The airline asked then to do web check-in and reserve their seats. Accordingly, the Dr. Nandy and his wife did web checking and reserved their seats by paying an extra Rs 7,200. But when they reached the airport, they came to know that there were indeed free seats available and some passengers managed to get them. Consequently, Dr. Nandy and his wife contended that the airline misled them, resulting in a loss. Therefore, they filed a complaint with the consumer commission, claiming a deficiency in the airline’s service.The original district consumer commission order directed the airline to refund Rs 7,200 with 6% interest from the from the date of repudiation of claim i.e. 05/10/2017 till the date of order i.e. October 26, 2020. Plus Rs 5,000 and Rs 3,000 was also directed to be paid to Dr. Nandy and his wife for mental agony and litigation cost, respectively. The Mumbai State Consumer Commission upheld this order.On September 25, 2025, the president of the Maharashtra State Consumer Commission stated that if we closely look at the definition of dark pattern, it becomes clear that in this situation, the Opposite party (airline) failed to provide adequate information about the availability of free seats to the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife). This not only violated their (Complanants) consumer rights but also constituted an unfair trade practice, causing them trauma and mental distress.The Maharashtra State Consumer Commission further noted that there is no evidence to show that the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) were forced to pre-book seats. However, records indicate that the Complainants specifically requested two adjacent seats to avoid the inconvenience. Therefore, it can be inferred that the Complainants felt pressured to pay for seat reservations, even though free tickets were available.Additionally, the Maharashtra State Consumer Commission pointed out that the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) should have been informed about the free seat availability right after they booked their tickets. They could have secured these free seats which were allowed 48 hours before departure. The Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said: “Therefore, it can be said that the Complainants were kept in the dark. They were not provided proper and correct information regarding availability of free seats; thus, he pre-booked the seats by spending money for the same.”As a result, the complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) won the case against the airline and got compensation. Read on to know the full details of this case and how they won.Naman Singh Bagga, Partner, C&S Partners, said to ET Wealth Online: "The judgment promotes consumer transparency while acknowledging airline business models of offering certain services at a premium. It permits charging premiums for pre-booked seats but emphasizes full disclosure. The Commission found that airline subtly nudged consumers toward premium options, using “dark patterns” that impair informed choice. Such practices were deemed unfair trade practice. The key takeaway for consumers is that they can insist on complete disclosure of particulars of the services being offered at a premium."Also read: No arrears of salary for high school teacher for period of honorary appointment, rules Gauhati High CourtAditya Chopra, Managing Partner, The Victoriam Legalis (TVL), said: "The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, in a recent order, held the airline liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. It ruled that the airline misled its passengers and forced them to pay for flight seats, even though free seats were available. The Commission underscored that the airline had followed a dark pattern by not providing correct information to the passengers, thereby violating consumer rights. The key takeaway for consumers in this case is to avoid falling for dark patterns and to verify the genuineness of any add-ons offered by airlines. It also encourages reporting, inter alia, unfair trade practices and deficiencies in service."Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said this about dark pattern of airlineThe Maharashtra State Consumer Commission in its judgement (APPEAL NO.A/2021/15) said that according to the Complainant (Dr. Nandy and his wife), he was asked to pre-book the ticket so as to avoid inconvenience. The Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said that the Complainant (Dr. Nandy and his wife) was also informed that the free ticket would be available 48 hours prior to departure but he was informed that he may not get two ticket seats adjacent to each other which was necessary for them. Hence, the Complainants prebooked tickets and they came to know at the time of boarding that free tickets were available and therefore they felt that they were misguided by the Opposite Party (airline) and forced to pre-book their tickets.Also read: Wife to get central government pension under CCS rules as husband went missing for more than seven years: Chhattisgarh High Court order The Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said that the airline admitted in court that Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) had pre-booked their tickets and it was not compulsory but the Complainant had informed that he wanted two seats adjacent to each other as he was an ailing person. Maharashtra State Consumer Commission says airline impliedly forced them to pre-book seatsThough the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) had booked the tickets much prior to the departure. It is the case of the Opposite Party (airline) that the Complainants were not compelled to prebook seats. The Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said: “It appears that there is no material on record to establish that the Complainants were forced to prebook seats but the fact establish on record that the Complainants wanted two seats adjacent to each other to avoid the inconvenience. So, it can be said that impliedly the Complainants were forced to pre-book seats by paying the charges, though free tickets were available.”Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said that the airline could have allotted the seats at the time of booking of the tickets. But as per the direction of the Opposite Party (airline), the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) prebooked the tickets to avoid the inconvenience but at the same time the free tickets were available at the time of booking of the tickets but those were not allotted. Therefore, the Complainants were required to spend Rs 7,200 to reserve their seats. It appears from the evidence of the Complainant (Dr. Nandy and his wife) that they came to know that the free tickets were available 48 hours prior to boarding but the Opposite Party (airline) did not give proper information to the Complainants. Therefore, they prebooked their seats.Also read: Higher pension due on July 1 due to annual increment to be allowed to employee retiring on June 30 in this condition: Punjab & Haryana High Court Maharashtra State Consumer Commission: Airline did not inform about availability of free seatsThe airline said that it is a practice of all airlines to sell some tickets by accepting premium but at the same time it was the duty of the airline to notify which seats they wished to sell for a premium. Similarly, there were duty bound to disclose which free seats were available.Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said: “In the present case the Opposite Party (airline) did not inform the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) about the free seats available on the flight. Therefore, the Complainants sought to prebook their seats and spent Rs 7,200.”Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said that in fact, the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) should have been informed about the availability of free seats immediately after booking of the tickets. He would have obtained free seats which were allowed 48 hours prior to departure. “Therefore, it can be said that the Complainants were kept in the dark. They were not provided proper and correct information regarding availability of free seats; thus, he pre booked the seats by spending money for the same.”Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said that the facts remain on record that the airline concealed the information regarding free seats from the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife).Also read: Daughter's application for compassionate appointment after father's death is objected by a lady claiming to be 'widow'; she fights back and wins in HC Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said: “Therefore, they kept the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) unaware of the required information. So, in this way, the Opposite Party (airline) followed the dark pattern. The Dark Patterns means “any practices or deceptive design patterns using UI/UX (user interface/user experience) interactions on any platform, designed to mislead or trick users to do something they originally did not intend or want to do; by subverting or impairing the consumer autonomy, decision making or choice, amounting to misleading advertisement or unfair trade practice or violation of consumer rights.”Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said: “If we perused the definition of dark pattern, it can be said that in the present case by not providing proper information regarding availability of free seats to Complainant (Dr. Nandy and his wife), the Opposite Party (airline) has violated the consumer rights and also played unfair trade practice and caused trauma and mental agony to the Complainants.”Also read: Possession delay: MahaREAT asked homebuyer to pay Rs 13 lakh interest to builder despite 2.5 years delay in delivery of Rs 1.65 crore apartmentMaharashtra State Consumer Commission said that the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) came to know about the availability of free seats at the time of boarding from other passengers and the said fact is not denied because it is case of the Opposite Party (airline) that some free seats were available 48 hours prior to departure but it was not told to the Complainants that they may get convenient seats, if they make web checking 48 hours prior to departure. Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said: “So, Complainants were impliedly forced to pre-book their seats on payment. Such practice would come under unfair trade practice and similarly violates the consumer rights of information. Therefore, the Opposite Party has committed deficiency in service. Similarly, they also committed unfair trade practice with the Complainants.”Also read: Rs 1.5 crore tax refund withheld by Income Tax Dept due to mismatch between ITR and Form 26AS; taxpayer files case, wins in High CourtMaharashtra State Consumer Commission judgmentJustice S.P. Tavade, president of Maharashtra State Consumer Commission said:The District Commission has correctly held that the Complainants (Dr. Nandy and his wife) were forced to prebook their seats though the free seats are available and caused mental trauma and agony. Similarly, such practice can be called as unfair trade practice as well as violation of consumer rights. Therefore, we do not found any fault in the reasoning and order passed by the District Commission. Hence, we confirmed the said order and found that the appeal has no merit. Hence, we pass the following order -The Appeal bearing No.A/2021/15 is hereby dismissed. The order passed by South Mumbai Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in CC/07/2018 is hereby confirmed. No order as to cost. Copy of this order be furnished to both the parties free of costs.
