Consumer court rejects plea against airline over baggage

Story by  PTI | Posted by  Vidushi Gaur | Date 29-07-2026
Supreme Court of India
Supreme Court of India

 

Mumbai

A consumer commission has dismissed a complaint against Brussels Airlines filed by a passenger who was not allowed to board his flight after refusing to pay excess baggage fee and missing the check-in deadline as a result.

An airline cannot be held guilty of "deficiency in service" for enforcing a standard contractual condition, said the additional district consumer disputes redressal commission, Mumbai Suburban, in an order passed on Tuesday.

The complainant, a Versova resident, had booked economy-class tickets for himself and his two children to travel from Mumbai to Manchester via Brussels on September 12, 2017.

His luggage was substantially in excess of the permissible free allowance, so the ground staff asked him to pay excess baggage charges.

The complainant refused to pay and insisted that he be allowed to travel without paying any extra chages. He then decided to rearrange his luggage, but by the time he returned to the check-in counter, the check-in deadline had expired.

He had to travel with another carrier, and subsequently approached the consumer commission seeking compensation from Brussels Airlines.

The commission noted that the complainant missed the check-in deadline because of his refusal to pay for excess luggage.

"Such timelines are fundamental operational requirements in commercial aviation and are uniformly applicable to all passengers. Once the check-in process is closed, the carrier cannot ordinarily accept passengers without disturbing operational schedules, security protocols and aviation safety requirements," the commission said.

The airline had acted in accordance with its standard baggage policy, it noted.

READ MORE: Maimoona Nargis: Art conservator preserving India's heritage

"Merely because the complainant suffered inconvenience or had to purchase fresh tickets from another airline would not by itself establish deficiency in service, when such consequences resulted from his own failure to comply with the contractual requirements," the commission said.