Compensation may increase if any omission on part of Air India staff is established

IANS June 12, 2025 464 views

The Carriage by Air Act 1972 provides a complex legal framework for airline passenger compensation. Victims' families can potentially receive higher damages if proven airline negligence exists. Standard liability is capped at 2,50,000 francs, but this limit can be lifted through legal challenges. International conventions like the Warsaw Convention underpin these compensation mechanisms, offering protection for air travel passengers.

"The carrier is liable for damage sustained in the event of the death or wounding of a passenger" - Carriage by Air Act, Rule 17
New Delhi, June 12: Amid the nationwide mourning over the deaths in the Ahmedabad air crash, all eyes will be on the findings of the inquiry, as any "omission" on the part of the airline may have huge implications on the subsequent award of compensation.

Key Points

1

Compensation can exceed standard limits if airline negligence is proven

2

Warsaw Convention governs international air carrier liability

3

Legal framework allows higher damages for reckless actions

The Carriage by Air Act 1972 is the guiding statute on the compensation that the victims and their kin get in the event of injury or death, and the final relief amount would be higher than the limited liability of the carrier if any "omission" on its part is proved.

A clause related to limited liability of an airline stipulates a maximum amount (francs 2,50,000) that the carrier is supposed to pay to a victim under Rules 17 and 22 of the Second Schedule to the Carriage by Air Act 1972.

Rule 17 of the Act says, "The carrier is liable for damage sustained in the event of the death or wounding of a passenger or any other bodily injury suffered by a passenger, if the accident which caused the damage so sustained took place on board the aircraft or in the course of any of the operations of embarking or disembarking."

However, the maximum amount of compensation allowed under Rule 17 is rendered inapplicable if the victim or his kin manage to prove, in court, recklessness on the part of the airline or its employees.

The compensation amount can be higher than the stipulated limited liability amount if it is proved that the damage resulted from an act or omission of the airline done recklessly and with knowledge that damage would probably result, to render the limit of liability inapplicable.

Rule 25 of the Second Schedule to the Carriage by Air Act, 1972, says, "The limits of liability specified in Rule 22 shall not apply if it is proved that the damage resulted from an act or omission of the carrier, his servants or agents, done with intent to cause damage or recklessly and with knowledge that damage would probably result; provided that, in the case of such act or omission of a servant or agent, it is also proved that he was acting within the scope of his employment."

India is a signatory to the Warsaw Convention 1929, and the Warsaw Convention as amended by the Hague Protocol 1955, which forms the foundation of an international legal regime governing the liability of air carriers for injury or death of passengers. The two were given effect by the Carriage by Air Act 1972.

In the 1988 air crash at Ahmedabad that killed 133 people, the family members of the deceased were involved in a protracted legal battle for higher compensation that ended in their favour in 2009, after a wait of over two decades.

Reader Comments

R
Rajesh K.
This is why we need stronger aviation safety regulations in India. No amount of compensation can bring back lives, but proper accountability will prevent future tragedies. Air India must take full responsibility if negligence is proven. 🇮🇳
P
Priya M.
The 1988 case taking 21 years for justice is heartbreaking! Courts should have special fast-track procedures for such cases. Families deserve closure, not decades of legal battles. Hope the current system is more efficient 🙏
A
Amit S.
While compensation is important, we must focus more on preventive measures. Regular aircraft maintenance checks, proper staff training and stricter implementation of safety protocols should be non-negotiable. Jai Hind!
S
Sunita R.
The compensation amounts mentioned seem too low by today's standards. 2.5 lakh francs (about ₹2 crore) might sound big, but is it really enough when you lose your sole breadwinner? The laws need updating for inflation.
V
Vikram J.
Respectfully, while we demand accountability from airlines, we should also acknowledge that aviation is inherently risky. Sometimes accidents happen despite best efforts. The system should be fair to both passengers and airlines.
N
Neha P.
The article mentions 'recklessness' as key for higher compensation. But how do ordinary families prove this? Most don't have resources to fight big airlines. Government should provide free legal aid in such cases. #JusticeForAll

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Your email won't be published


Disclaimer: Comments here reflect the author's views alone. Insulting or using offensive language against individuals, communities, religion, or the nation is illegal.

Tags: