Fair trade regulator CCI on Wednesday dismissed a complaint alleging abuse of market dominance by InterGlobe Aviation and Air India.

The complainant alleged that the domestic carriers were maintaining unconscionable and illegal rates of cancellation charges and imposing arbitrary conditions and prices for the sale of services.

According to the complainant, InterGlobe Aviation, which operates IndiGo, held more than 65% share in the domestic aviation sector, while Air India accounted for around 27%.

Together, both these players control about 90% of the market share, raising concerns of dominance and possible anti-competitive practices, as per the complaint.

After examining the information, the Commission said the allegations did not establish any prima facie violation of competition law provisions.

CCI noted that the allegation of abuse of dominance does not warrant further examination as OPs (InterGlobe Aviation and Air India) have in place a system for refund of tickets, and it is possible for passengers to have a substantially refundable ticket if they opt for that category of ticket.

The refund and cancellation terms are disclosed to passengers in advance. These are applied equally to all consumers and not in a discriminatory, unfair or exclusionary manner, the competition watchdog added.

"In view of the information provided, the Commission is of the opinion that no prima facie case of contravention of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act is made out against OP-1 and OP-2. Accordingly, the Information is directed to be closed... under Section 26(2) of the Act," it said in the order.

Sections 3 and 4 pertain to anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position, respectively.

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has also rejected a separate application filed by the complainant seeking a joint investigation with another ongoing case related to mass flight cancellations by IndiGo in December 2025.

The regulator noted that the issues involved are entirely different from the present matter, and therefore, there is no occasion for a joint investigation.