Bengaluru man fights automatic service charge, wins refund & Rs 7,000 relief
Bengaluru: Service charge dragged an RR Nagar bar into a consumer dispute when a 27-year-old man objected to an automatic charge levied on his food bill. The II additional district consumer disputes redressal commission termed the levy an unfair trade practice and ordered a full refund with compensation.The saga began on the evening of Aug 18, 2025, when Harsha Prabhakar, a resident of Chikkalsandra, along with his friends, visited Stories Bar & Kitchen in Rajarajeshwari Nagar. He was presented with a bill totalling Rs 3,443, including an arbitrarily added 10% service charge, amounting to Rs 307.
This imposition was made without any prior, explicit, or informed consent from Prabhakar, transforming what should have been a voluntary gratuity into a compulsory levy. Shocked by this unwarranted charge, Prabhakar immediately objected to its inclusion and explicitly requested its removal from the bill. However, the restaurant, with what he described as brazen disregard for consumer autonomy, adamantly refused to accede to his request, stating that it levied a 10% service charge. When he argued that service charge was optional in nature, the staff disregarded his contention and asked him to clear the bill. Left with no recourse, Prabhakar was compelled to pay the full bill under protest. He alleged that this act constituted a restrictive trade practice by imposing an unjustified cost and condition. The payment was ultimately processed through UPI and cash.Prabhakar issued a legal notice, dated Aug 19, 2025, to the eatery. When there was no response, he filed a consumer complaint on Sept 17, 2025. He also contended that the restaurant's continued practice of auto-levying service charge posed an ongoing threat to consumer rights. Notice was served on Stories Bar & Kitchen, but it failed to appear and was placed ex parte. After going through all the evidence, the commission noted that the documentary evidence placed on record also remained unchallenged. The commission noted that the 2022 Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) guidelines clearly prohibit hotels and restaurants from imposing service charge in bills and allow consumers to file complaints in case of violation. The commission held that the restaurant had indulged in an unfair trade practice by levying the service charge in the bill issued to Prabhakar. The restaurant did not contest the case or demonstrate how it did not commit any unfair trade practice. During the oral arguments, counsel for Prabhakar cited the March 28, 2025 judgment of the Delhi high court on petitions by the National Restaurant Association of India and the Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations of India against the Union of India. The court held that CCPA is fully empowered to issue binding guidelines under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. It ruled that a service charge or tip is purely voluntary and cannot be made compulsory, and that automatic levy in a coercive manner violates consumer rights and amounts to an unfair trade practice. It also clarified that merely displaying a service charge on the menu does not bind consumers, and any tip must be left to the customer's discretion. The court upheld the validity of the CCPA guidelines and directed all restaurants to comply with them. On Feb 13, the commission bench, comprising president Vijaykumar M Pawale and member Anuradha, ordered the restaurant to refund the service charge with 18% interest from the payment date till realisation. It also ordered the eatery to pay Rs 5,000 as compensation and Rs 2,000 as litigation costs.
This imposition was made without any prior, explicit, or informed consent from Prabhakar, transforming what should have been a voluntary gratuity into a compulsory levy. Shocked by this unwarranted charge, Prabhakar immediately objected to its inclusion and explicitly requested its removal from the bill. However, the restaurant, with what he described as brazen disregard for consumer autonomy, adamantly refused to accede to his request, stating that it levied a 10% service charge. When he argued that service charge was optional in nature, the staff disregarded his contention and asked him to clear the bill. Left with no recourse, Prabhakar was compelled to pay the full bill under protest. He alleged that this act constituted a restrictive trade practice by imposing an unjustified cost and condition. The payment was ultimately processed through UPI and cash.Prabhakar issued a legal notice, dated Aug 19, 2025, to the eatery. When there was no response, he filed a consumer complaint on Sept 17, 2025. He also contended that the restaurant's continued practice of auto-levying service charge posed an ongoing threat to consumer rights. Notice was served on Stories Bar & Kitchen, but it failed to appear and was placed ex parte. After going through all the evidence, the commission noted that the documentary evidence placed on record also remained unchallenged. The commission noted that the 2022 Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) guidelines clearly prohibit hotels and restaurants from imposing service charge in bills and allow consumers to file complaints in case of violation. The commission held that the restaurant had indulged in an unfair trade practice by levying the service charge in the bill issued to Prabhakar. The restaurant did not contest the case or demonstrate how it did not commit any unfair trade practice. During the oral arguments, counsel for Prabhakar cited the March 28, 2025 judgment of the Delhi high court on petitions by the National Restaurant Association of India and the Federation of Hotel and Restaurant Associations of India against the Union of India. The court held that CCPA is fully empowered to issue binding guidelines under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. It ruled that a service charge or tip is purely voluntary and cannot be made compulsory, and that automatic levy in a coercive manner violates consumer rights and amounts to an unfair trade practice. It also clarified that merely displaying a service charge on the menu does not bind consumers, and any tip must be left to the customer's discretion. The court upheld the validity of the CCPA guidelines and directed all restaurants to comply with them. On Feb 13, the commission bench, comprising president Vijaykumar M Pawale and member Anuradha, ordered the restaurant to refund the service charge with 18% interest from the payment date till realisation. It also ordered the eatery to pay Rs 5,000 as compensation and Rs 2,000 as litigation costs.
You Can Also Check: Bengaluru AQI
|
Bank Holidays in Bengaluru |
Gold Rate Today in Bengaluru |
Silver Rate Today in Bengaluru
Popular from City
- Chosen by Jayalalithaa, chucked by Palaniswami, 3-time Tamil Nadu CM O Panneerselvam to join DMK today
- UK to issue eVisas from February 25; no need to hand over passports during processing
- Uttarakhand horror: 15-year-old forced to drink, gang-raped in car; 2 held
- Protests at JNU escalate, over 50 students held amid heavy police deployment
- Delhi court directs cricketer Shikhar Dhawan’s ex-wife to return Rs 5.7cr
end of article
Trending Stories
- India GDP Q3 Growth Data 2026 Live Updates: First GDP data under new series to be released today
- 'Priyanka wasn't talking to me': Rahul Gandhi on how Wayanad helped end sibling tiff - watch
- Rinku Singh’s father passes away after cancer battle, cricket world stands with grieving batter
- Pakistan-Afghanistan tensions live updates: Loud explosions rock Kabul after Pakistan launches major attack on Afghanistan
- India vs Australia Live Score, 2nd Women ODI: India opt to bat against Australia
- Strike-rate problem? Not anymore. India smash Zimbabwe, shatter records to keep semi-final hopes alive
- 'Don't you think evidence is required': Delhi high court refuses to entertain Ghaziabad man's plea over wife’s death in Nepal protests; sought Rs 75 crore from Hyatt Regency Kathmandu, Rs 25 crore from Centre
Featured in city
- Indore-Pune Air India Express flight’s rough landing causes scare for 160 flyers
- Un-fare deal: Namma Metro fare hike sparks backlash as Bengaluru commuters shift back to private vehicles
- Odisha farmer dies after 4-day wait to sell paddy, sparks political row
- Gurdaspur teen's kin seek autopsy by special board
- O Panneerselvam likely to join DMK today ‘to take on Palaniswami’
- IYC protest: Himachal Pradesh-Delhi Police standoff drags on till dawn; judge grants 18-hour remand at midnight
Photostories
- Baby names for girls born on Friday
- From Farah Khan–Shirish Kunder to Shikhar Dhawan–Sophie Shine: 5 Indian celebrity couples that prove age is just a number
- 5 common mistakes to avoid in real estate investment
- 6 muscle cars known for their legendary engine sound
- World’s best countries for women in 2025–26 revealed
- From Dahi vada to Dahi gujiyai: 9 traditional curd-based dishes to enjoy this Holi
- How to grow sweet smelling jasmine flower for summer in balcony garden
- Mansa Devi Mandir: The sacred Shakti Peeth where dreams come true
- Morning metabolism boost: 5 habits that may help burn fat naturally and support lasting energy
- 7 days mantra guide for you; attract positive vibes
Videos
06:46 Pakistan Launches Operation Ghazab, Declares Open War Against Afghanistan As India Keeps Close Watch19:13 'AI Only Works With What Has Been Expressed So Far': Prasoon Joshi Gets Candid At DNPA 202605:07 Indian Navy’s New Hunter, INS Anjadip To Targets Submarines Close To Coast15:43 Fair Pay, Consent, Online Safety: Ashwini Vaishnaw Draws Red Line For Digital Platforms29:35 India & Israel Sign Multiple MoUs On Agriculture & AI During PM Modi & Netanyahu's Bilateral Meet08:31 'We Do See A Role, But..': India Backs Trump's Gaza Plan As Modi, Israel PM Discuss US-Iran Conflict05:02 ‘India Essential To Middle East Future’: Israeli Prez Herzog Tells PM Modi, Lauds Economic Growth12:16 'UPI Will Be Used In Israel': PM Modi After Key Meet With Netanyahu, Pushes India-Israel FTA06:33 I&B Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw Sounds Big Alert On Cybercrime, Pushes Fair Revenue For Creators
Up Next
Start a Conversation
Post comment