2 hrs ago
Delhi Consumer Court Finds Swiggy Pricing Misleading, Orders Compensation
A customer used Swiggy Dineout to book a meal for a group.
The app showed that food for two people would cost ₹1,500.
At the restaurant, the buffet price was much higher than that amount.
The customer also said the restaurant added a 10% charge to beverages.
A Delhi consumer commission decided that the price shown on the app was misleading because it did not say it was only an estimate.
The commission said both the restaurant and Swiggy had responsibility in the case.
The restaurant must return some of the money, with interest.
Swiggy and the restaurant must also pay the customer ₹1 lakh in compensation.
A Delhi consumer commission held Swiggy operator Bundl Technologies and Themis Barbeque House responsible for misleading pricing.
Swiggy Dineout displayed a ₹1,500 “cost for two,” while the restaurant charged ₹1,050 for vegetarian and ₹1,100 for non-vegetarian buffets per person.
The commission said the displayed figure differed from the final prices by roughly 40–47% and was not identified as an estimate.
Themis was ordered to refund ₹3,988 for excess charges and ₹254 for a beverage service charge, with 9% annual interest.
Swiggy and the restaurant were jointly ordered to pay ₹1 lakh in compensation for inconvenience, harassment, mental agony and litigation costs.
- Who
- Complainant Praveen Kumar Singh, Swiggy operator Bundl Technologies Pvt. Ltd., and Themis Barbeque House.
- What
- A Delhi consumer commission found misleading pricing and an undisclosed beverage service charge, ordering refunds and ₹1 lakh in joint compensation.
- Where
- Themis Barbeque House in Delhi, booked through Swiggy Dineout.
- When
- The booking and dining took place on April 7, 2024; the article does not state the order date.
- Why
- The app displayed a ₹1,500 “cost for two” without saying it was an estimate, while the restaurant charged substantially higher buffet prices and added a beverage service charge.
Consumer and Commission View
Swiggy's View
Responsibility for the listing
Consumer and Commission View
The commission held that the restaurant placed the advertisement and Swiggy displayed the representation, making both responsible for the misleading pricing.
Swiggy's View
Swiggy argued that it was only an intermediary and was not responsible for information about products or services listed by restaurants.
Meaning of “cost for two”
Consumer and Commission View
The commission said the figure was misleading because the listing did not state that it was merely an estimate, and the final prices differed materially.
Swiggy's View
Swiggy argued that ₹1,500 was an average or estimated amount and that customers could view detailed menus and actual prices before booking.
Intermediary protection
Consumer and Commission View
The commission rejected Swiggy's reliance on Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, saying protection depended on meeting due-diligence requirements.
Swiggy's View
Swiggy invoked the intermediary protection available under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
Key facts
- App-listed price
- ₹1,500 as the “cost for two,” or ₹750 per person.
- Actual buffet prices
- ₹1,050 per person for vegetarian buffet and ₹1,100 per person for non-vegetarian buffet.
- Price difference
- The commission described the difference as roughly 40–47%.
- Excess-charge refund
- Themis Barbeque House must refund ₹3,988, plus 9% annual interest from April 7, 2024.
- Service-charge refund
- The restaurant must refund ₹254 for the beverage service charge, plus 9% annual interest from April 7, 2024.
- Joint compensation
- Swiggy and Themis Barbeque House must pay ₹1 lakh for mental agony, harassment, inconvenience and litigation costs.
- Payment deadline
- The refund and interest were to be paid within four weeks of receipt of the order.
Sources
Related news
Consumer Forum Orders Zomato To Pay ₹8,250 Over Cancelled Orders
Court Holds MakeMyTrip Liable After Kashmir Family’s Hotel Nightmare
CCPA Fines Rapido ₹10 Lakh Over Dark Patterns
Himachal Consumer Commission Orders Retailer to Pay Rs 8,010
Delhi Consumer Court Holds Hotel Liable for Coldplay Booking Cancellation
Hyderabad Consumer Forum Rejects Rs 4 Crore Bag Claim
KMC food safety drive prompts restaurateurs to seek fairer inspections
Kolkata Restaurateurs Support Food Safety Checks, Seek Fair Enforcement
Kolkata Summons 29 Hotels Over Basic Fire Safety Violations
Gujarat’s changing food market attracts national and global brands
