1 day ago
Delhi Panel Holds Swiggy, Restaurant Liable for Misleading Buffet Price
A customer booked a table for 14 people through Swiggy Dineout.
The app showed a price for two that suggested each person would pay Rs 750.
At the restaurant, the buffet cost Rs 1,050 per person for vegetarian food and Rs 1,100 for non-vegetarian food.
The restaurant also charged a service fee on drinks that was not shown on the menu.
A Delhi consumer commission said the price difference was misleading and found both the restaurant and Swiggy responsible.
Swiggy said it was only an intermediary, but the commission said it had not shown that it checked the displayed price against the actual bill.
The restaurant must return the extra buffet and service-charge money with 9% annual interest.
Both parties must also pay Rs 1 lakh in compensation.
They have four weeks after receiving the order to pay, or 12% annual interest applies to the awarded amount.
A Delhi consumer commission held Swiggy and Themis Barbeque House responsible for a misleading buffet price on Swiggy Dineout.
Advocate Praveen Kumar Singh booked a table for 14 for April 7, 2024; the listing showed a cost for two of Rs 1,500.
The restaurant charged Rs 1,050 per person for vegetarian buffet and Rs 1,100 for non-vegetarian buffet, about 40–47% above the implied rate.
The commission ordered the restaurant to refund Rs 3,988 in excess buffet charges and Rs 254 in service charge, with 9% annual interest.
Swiggy and the restaurant must jointly and severally pay Rs 1 lakh compensation within four weeks; afterward, 12% annual interest applies to the entire awarded amount.
- Who
- Advocate Praveen Kumar Singh; Swiggy; and Themis Barbeque House.
- What
- A Delhi consumer commission held Swiggy and the restaurant responsible for misleading buffet pricing and ordered refunds and compensation.
- Where
- Themis Barbeque House, booked through Swiggy Dineout in Delhi.
- When
- The booking was for April 7, 2024; the commission's order was dated September 21 and was reported on October 3.
- Why
- The listing implied a lower price than the restaurant charged, and the commission found the undisclosed service charge improper.
Swiggy's position
Commission's findings
Swiggy's role and responsibility
Swiggy's position
Swiggy argued it was merely an intermediary and was protected under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act.
Commission's findings
The commission rejected that defense, saying Swiggy had not shown due diligence or a mechanism to reconcile the displayed price with actual billing.
Displayed buffet price
Swiggy's position
The articles report no separate defense from Swiggy or the restaurant explaining the price listing.
Commission's findings
The commission said the listing did not identify the “cost for two” as an estimate and that the 40–47% difference was material, amounting to deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
Service charge
Swiggy's position
The articles report no specific defense from the restaurant about the service charge.
Commission's findings
The commission found the 10% beverage charge was not disclosed on the menu and was improperly described on the bill, making it a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
Key facts
- Customer
- Advocate Praveen Kumar Singh
- Booking
- Table for 14 through Swiggy Dineout for April 7, 2024
- Displayed price
- Rs 1,500 as the listed cost for two, implying Rs 750 per person
- Buffet prices charged
- Rs 1,050 per person for vegetarian and Rs 1,100 per person for non-vegetarian
- Refunds
- Rs 3,988 for excess buffet charges and Rs 254 for the service charge, with 9% annual interest
- Compensation
- Rs 1 lakh jointly and severally payable by Swiggy and Themis Barbeque House
- Payment deadline
- Within four weeks of receiving the order; afterward, 12% annual interest applies to the entire awarded amount
- Service-charge finding
- A 10% charge on beverages was not disclosed on the menu; the bill called it “Service Charge” rather than “Staff Contribution”
Quotes
Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The consumer commission that adjudicated the complaint against Swiggy and the restaurant.
“The OP-1 (Swiggy) cannot escape from its responsibility merely by quoting section 79 of the Information Technology Act. It has to show conclusively that the OP-1 was performing due diligence in all respects as necessitated in the respective legislations and rules framed thereunder.”
theprint.in
NDTV
thehansindia.com
Sources
Swiggy Dineout Price Shock: Consumer Panel Orders Rs 1 Lakh Payout Over Misleading Buffet Rate; Here's What Happened
Delhi consumer panel holds Swiggy, restaurant liable for misleading price, orders Rs 1L payout
Swiggy, Restaurant Told To Pay Rs 1 Lakh To Customer For "Misleading" Price
Delhi consumer panel holds Swiggy, restaurant liable; Orders Rs 1L payout
Related news
Delhi Consumer Court Finds Swiggy Pricing Misleading, Orders Compensation
Court Holds MakeMyTrip Liable After Kashmir Family’s Hotel Nightmare
Delhi Commission Orders Refund And Compensation For Milk App Wallet
CCPA Fines Rapido ₹10 Lakh Over Dark Patterns
Top Jaipur Halwais Boycott Zomato Over Rising Commissions
Delhi Consumer Court Holds Hotel Liable for Coldplay Booking Cancellation
Karnataka Gig-Worker Scheme Faces Test as Unions Seek Benefits
IndiaTech Seeks Changes to Gig Worker Social Security Levy
Young Indian founders build businesses before turning twenty-five
