Hair in In-Flight Meal: Madras HC Holds Air India Liable, Slashes Compensation to Rs. 35,000

The bench of Justice P.B. Balaji, on October 10, 2025, partly allowed an appeal filed by Air India against the judgment of the III Additional City Civil Court, Chennai, which had awarded Rs. 1 lakh damages to passenger P. Sundarapariporanam. The passenger had travelled from Colombo to Chennai on June 26, 2002, by Air India’s IC 574 flight when he allegedly found strands of hair in the sealed food packet served onboard.

According to the complaint, the incident left the passenger nauseous, and he later experienced vomiting and stomach pain. After landing, he lodged a formal complaint with Air India’s Deputy General Manager (Commercial) at Chennai Airport. The airline responded with an apology, stating the issue was being investigated. Unconvinced, the passenger issued a legal notice seeking Rs. 11 lakh in damages. In response, Air India again expressed regret but denied any negligence.

The airline defended itself before the trial court by claiming that the catering services were outsourced to Ambassador Pallava, a five-star hotel, and that the caterer was responsible for the alleged contamination. It further argued that the plaintiff’s claim was speculative, that he had not lodged an on-board complaint, and that an apology issued as a matter of courtesy could not be treated as an admission of fault. Despite no oral or documentary evidence from either side, the trial court in 2022 held Air India negligent and awarded Rs. 1 lakh as compensation.

On appeal, Air India’s counsel, Advocate S. Satish Kumar, argued that the plaintiff never stepped into the witness box and had failed to discharge the burden of proof necessary in a claim for damages. He cited several Supreme Court and High Court judgments to assert that compensation could not be awarded without evidence.

Opposing this, counsel for the respondent, Advocate R. Subramanian, contended that Air India’s own pleadings and correspondence amounted to an admission of the incident. He further argued that there was no contractual relationship between the passenger and the caterer, and Air India, having charged the full ticket fare inclusive of meals, could not transfer responsibility to its contractor.

Court agreed that Air India’s written statement contained contradictory positions, which simultaneously denied and admitted the complaint. It noted that the airline had even acknowledged that the issue was “radioed through company channels” and that a senior catering manager met the passenger after landing. “The defendants have blown hot and cold in their written statement,” Justice Balaji observed.

Applying the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, which means “the thing speaks for itself”, court held that the presence of hair in an in-flight meal was in itself proof of negligence.

It, however, found fault with the trial court’s decision to award damages without any evidence of loss or injury. “The plaintiff has not entered the witness box and has failed to prove the extent of harm suffered,” the court held.

While setting aside the Rs. 1 lakh compensation, the bench concluded that Air India’s conduct warranted costs for negligence and for attempting to pass the blame to the caterer.

Court directed the airline to pay Rs. 35,000 (Rs. 15,000 towards court costs and Rs. 20,000 as counsel’s fee) to the respondent within four weeks.

Case Title: General Manager, Southern India Region, M/s.Air India Limited and Others vs. P.Sundarapariporanam

Order Date: October 10, 2025

Bench: Justice P.B. Balaji