Bengaluru Passenger Awarded Compensation After Traumatic In-Flight Curry Spill
What began as a routine journey from Bangkok to Bengaluru transformed into a distressing ordeal for one passenger when a flight attendant accidentally spilled hot non-vegetarian curry on him shortly after takeoff. The incident, which occurred high above the ground, led to a significant legal battle that recently concluded with the airline being held accountable.
The Unfortunate Incident and Immediate Aftermath
The saga unfolded on March 5, 2024, when Sree Nayak (name changed), a resident of Konanakunte Cross in Bengaluru, was traveling with his wife and daughter. The family had paid Rs 12,404 for his ticket and Rs 24,808 for their combined fares. Approximately fifteen minutes after departure, a flight attendant opened the overhead bin above Nayak's seat, causing a hot food packet to fall directly on him. The packet spilled curry and other contents, creating an immediate crisis.
Nayak, who identifies as vegetarian, described experiencing extreme discomfort, including skin irritation and a severe headache from the pungent smell that persisted for eight hours until he reached home. He reported feeling shocked and traumatized by the event, which also placed him at risk. His clothing—a branded T-shirt, jeans, jacket, shoes, and innerwear—was irreparably stained, while his backpack, smartwatch, and mobile phone sustained damage. Compounding his distress, co-passengers allegedly laughed at the situation, and he was unable to change clothes or bathe immediately, leading to significant embarrassment.
The Airline's Response and Legal Proceedings
According to Nayak, the airline acknowledged negligence through phone and email communications and offered a Rs 5,000 travel voucher as compensation. However, he deemed this inadequate given the physical and mental suffering he endured. Seeking redress, he filed a consumer complaint on July 5, 2025, demanding Rs 5 lakh in compensation for mental harassment and other losses.
In its defense, IndiGo, represented by its manager, denied any deficiency in service. The airline argued that under consumer law, a deficiency only arises when there is a shortcoming in the quality, nature, or manner of service as mandated by law or contract. Citing a past in-flight incident where a meal container accidentally slipped from an overhead bin, IndiGo maintained that the event was unintentional and unforeseen.
The airline stated that its crew responded promptly by apologizing, relocating Nayak to a first-row seat, assisting in cleaning his clothes, and providing wet tissues. IndiGo's customer experience team contacted the complainant on March 9, 2024, but later characterized his Rs 5 lakh compensation demand as illegal and exorbitant. As a goodwill gesture, the airline repeatedly offered the Rs 5,000 travel voucher, which Nayak declined, leading IndiGo to urge the commission to dismiss the complaint.
Commission's Ruling and Final Judgment
After thoroughly examining the records and hearing arguments from both parties, the III additional Bengaluru Urban district consumer disputes redressal commission delivered its verdict. The commission held that opening an overhead bin after takeoff, resulting in a hot meal falling on a passenger, constituted a clear lapse in service. It observed that airlines are at fault if loose or hot items are stored in a manner that endangers passengers.
However, the commission noted that Nayak failed to provide credible evidence to substantiate claims of medical expenses or irreparable damage to his clothing. The bench, comprising President Shivarama K and members Chandrashekar S Noola and Rekha Sayannavar, issued its order on December 12, 2025. It directed IndiGo to pay the complainant Rs 20,000 as compensation and an additional Rs 5,000 to cover litigation costs, marking a significant victory for consumer rights in air travel incidents.
This case highlights the importance of airline accountability and passenger safety, serving as a reminder that even unintentional incidents can have serious consequences for travelers. The ruling underscores the legal recourse available to consumers when service deficiencies occur, particularly in high-stakes environments like air travel.
