Delhi court orders ITC Maurya to pay Rs 2 crore compensation to woman for wrong haircut
Aashna Roy, the complaint, was a model who had previously worked for VLCC and Pantene modelling hair products. She said that the incorrect haircut had left her "with little or practically no hair."
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ordered the hotel ITC Maurya to pay Rs 2 crore in compensation. The NCDRC has ordered a five-star Delhi hotel to compensate a woman for a bad haircut and treatment at the hotel's salon in 2018. Aashna Roy, the complaint, was a model who had previously worked for VLCC and Pantene modelling hair products. She said that the incorrect haircut had left her "with little or practically no hair." In accordance with the Consumer Protection Act, ITC Maurya has been given eight weeks to pay the money to Roy.
The judgement was issued by Justice RK Agrawal and Dr SM Kantikar, who stated that ladies are very particular about their hair and spend a lot of money to keep it in excellent shape. According to the ruling, the complainant lost numerous jobs as a result of "hair cutting against her instructions by the opposing Party No.2 (ITC Hotels Ltd)," which ruined her ambition of becoming a model. The order also accused the establishment of medical negligence.
The event occurred in 2018 when Roy went to the ITC Maurya salon for a haircut. Because her normal hairdresser was unavailable, the staff referred her to another hairstylist. Roy's hair was trimmed differently than she had requested. It then gave her a complimentary hair treatment. The therapy was "dubious," according to Roy.
Roy's scalp was purportedly burned due to the procedure, causing irreversible damage to her hair. According to her complaint, she is still experiencing allergies and itching as a result of the therapy.
The respondents in the case claimed that Roy's compensation claim was "ex-facie exaggerated and without any basis," and that the amount she claimed (Rs 3 crore) was inflated deliberately to invoke the court's jurisdiction, and that the "complaint is liable to be dismissed for lack of pecuniary jurisdiction." Roy stated that the irreversible damage to her hair had caused her to have a mental breakdown. She also claimed that she had lost money as a result of having to quit her work, and that she had been subjected to "pain and anguish" for the last two years.