Supreme Court Issues Notice To Air India On Plea Seeking Higher Compensation For 2020 Plane Crash In Kerala

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (Oct. 18) issued notice on the special leave petitions filed by the passengers seeking compensation for their losses in the tragic Air India Express Flight IX-1344 crash at Karipur International Airport, Kozhikkode in 2020. The Court also tagged it along with the civil appeals pending on the same issue arising out of the 2010 Mangalore air crash.

The Court ordered “Leave Granted. Respondent No. 2(Airline) takes notice. Then Issue notice in 6 weeks to others. Tag it along with 2 other matters(Civil Appeal No. 8128 and 8131 of 2018).”

The  bench comprising Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar was hearing a Special Leave Petition filed against a division bench judgment of the Kerala High Court which had dismissed the claim of the petitioners for compensation.

In the present case, the petitioners claim that, respondent no. 2, Air India Express, offered only a nominal compensation to the affected parties through negotiating agencies.

The petitioners accepted this compensation, believing it to be an interim settlement against what they considered the "second-tier liability" of the air carrier for damages incurred. They were expecting that their claims under the "first tier liability," as specified in Rule 21(1) of the Third Schedule of the Carriage By Air Act 1972, would be addressed separately. However, as respondent no. 2 failed to fulfill this statutorily defined liability towards the petitioners, they approached the High Court.

Initially, a Single Bench of the Kerala High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the reliefs sought were private and that respondent no. 2 had ceased to be a public functionary after the Government of India's complete disinvestment from the airline.

In appeal, the Division Bench rejected the petitioners' claim, asserting that they had voluntarily accepted the compensation initially offered and could not subsequently challenge it as being lower than the statutory provision.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners approached the Supreme Court.

At the outset, Senior Advocate and former Attorney General K. K. Venugopal, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted, “In the Air Crash, 168 people were injured. What is held against the petitioner that they had entered into agreements with Air India by which they accepted 12 lakhs, 35 lakhs and so on. The contention is under the Montreal Convention, 1.34 crores is a fixed amount that has to be paid. That’s why they have come up.”

In their petition, the aggrieved passengers state that the Division Bench failed to comprehend the structure of the Third Schedule of the Act, which has incorporated the Montreal Convention of 1999. This international convention and statutory schedule establish a two-tier compensation system for air carrier accident victims, with the first-tier compensation being non-negotiable.

The petitioners in the plea submit that the right to a minimum compensation of 1 Lakh Special Drawing Rights (SDR) is guaranteed under an international convention. They cite the precedent set by the Supreme Court in K.S. Puttaswami v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1, which held that rights conferred by international treaties or conventions are fundamental and non-waivable human rights protected under the Indian Constitution.

Furthermore, the petitioners submit that the Third Schedule was incorporated into the Carriage by Air Act, of 1972, as part of India's international obligations. India, as a member of the International Civil Aviation Organization and a signatory to the Montreal Convention of 1999, was bound to enact necessary legislation to implement this convention

Case title: Ashraf v. Union of India

Citation: SLP(C) No. 17025-17084/2023

For petitioner: Former Attorney General K. K. Venugopal, Senior Advocate V. Chitambaresh, Advocate Kodoth Sreedharan, and AOR Zulphiker appeared for the petitioners