Consumer Court Ruling Against Qatar Airways
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) in Ernakulam has issued a directive for Qatar Airways to compensate an Indian family with ₹10 lakh. This ruling comes after the airline denied boarding to the family’s minor children during their return flight from India to Italy. The decision, handed down on July 14, 2026, was delivered by a panel comprising President DB Binu, alongside members V Ramachandran and Sreevidhia TN.
Case Background
The case, [Roshan Jose & ors v. Qatar Airways], revolved around the airline’s refusal to allow the family’s 6-year-old and breastfeeding infant to board their return flight, despite the fact that the same documents had been accepted without issue on their initial flight from Venice, Italy, to Kochi, India. The commission deemed this inconsistent behavior as a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
President DB Binu noted, “The conduct of the opposite party in preventing a child from accompanying his parents on the return journey is wholly arbitrary and has shocked the conscience of this Commission… Having allowed the infant to travel from Venice to India, the subsequent refusal of permit for the return journey from India on the very same set of documents is patently inconsistent, unjustified and highly reprehensible.”
Details of the Incident
Complainant Roshan Jose, working in Italy, traveled with his family from Venice to Kochi via Doha in November 2018. Qatar Airways had verified their travel documents and issued boarding passes without objections. However, during their return on December 3, 2018, the airline refused boarding to their 6-year-old, citing a lack of an independent Italian visa.
This forced the parents to leave their child with relatives in Kerala and continue their journey with their infant. The saga continued in Doha, where after a 10-hour wait, the airline also denied boarding to the infant, compelling the mother to proceed alone to Italy to avoid job loss, while the father returned to Kochi with the infant.
The children were eventually brought back to Italy, incurring significant additional expenses for the family.
Airline Defense and Commission’s Rebuttal
Qatar Airways defended its actions by stating that passengers are responsible for valid travel documents and claimed they acted on instructions from immigration authorities in Venice and Doha. They cited Article 9 of the General Conditions of Carriage, claiming the right to refuse transport without valid documents.
However, the commission dismissed these arguments, emphasizing that if documents were indeed insufficient, the airline should have prevented the initial travel from Venice. The issuance of boarding passes from Kochi to Venice further invalidated their defense, rendering the refusal from Doha to Italy baseless.
More Read
Conclusion and Compensation
The commission concluded that the airline’s actions forced the family into a difficult situation, leading to severe emotional distress. Consequently, Qatar Airways was ordered to compensate the family with ₹10 lakh for mental anguish and ₹25,000 for litigation costs.
Legal representation was provided by Advocate S Asokan for the complainants and Advocate Philip T Varghese for Qatar Airways.
