Eventually, he booked another IndiGo flight two days later, paying nearly ₹17,000.In his complaint, Rawal argued that the airline’s conduct went beyond inconvenience. He alleged that IndiGo had cancelled flights in bulk, creating artificial scarcity in the market. The cancellations, it said, were not designed to manipulate prices or restrict supply.The Commission rejected IndiGo’s argument that it lacked jurisdiction. Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in, it held that sector-specific regulation does not bar the application of competition law. It also operates exclusively on hundreds of routes.The CCI further pointed to IndiGo’s financial strength and sustained profitability in a sector where many players have struggled.

Source: Economic Times February 05, 2026 10:30 UTC