Model sues 5-star hotel salon for bad haircut. Supreme Court awards Rs 25 lakh after 7-year legal battle

SC reduces model’s hotel haircut claim. (AI-generated image)

A visit to a salon is usually a simple matter of grooming, but for one Delhi-based model, a haircut in 2018 turned into a legal dispute that lasted for years. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court of India.

As reported by the Indian Express, earlier this month, the court delivered its verdict, reducing the compensation awarded to the model to Rs 25 lakh, after a long battle over alleged professional loss and emotional distress.

As per the report, on 12 April 2018, the model, a postgraduate from IIM Calcutta with a diploma in Mass Communication, visited the ITC Maurya hotel salon ahead of an important interview. She had requested long flicks or layers, but the result left her “with little or almost no hair.” She described herself as “shocked” when around four inches were trimmed from the bottom, contrary to her instructions.

The hotel corporation, however, maintained that the haircut was done “strictly as per her instructions and to her satisfaction.”

Following the incident, the model approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), claiming a deficiency in service. She stated that the haircut caused severe mental distress, a breakdown in confidence, and loss of modelling assignments.

In 2021, the NCDRC ruled in her favour, awarding Rs 2 crore in compensation. The commission noted that her hair had been cut “against her instructions” and acknowledged that she “underwent severe mental breakdown and trauma” as a result.

Initially, she had claimed Rs 3 crore, which she later increased to Rs 5.20 crore after the matter was sent back to the commission. Following the remand, the NCDRC again awarded Rs 2 crore, along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint.

ITC Limited challenged the NCDRC’s decision, arguing that the evidence supporting such a large award was insufficient. The Supreme Court agreed that damages should be based on credible proof, not “whims and fancies” of the complainant.

The court noted, “The damages cannot be awarded merely on presumptions or whims and fancies of the complainant. To make out a case for award of damages, especially when the claim is to the tune of crores of rupees, some trustworthy and reliable evidence has to be led. In our view, on the basis of photocopies of the documents placed on record by the respondent, the Commission has committed an error in awarding a huge amount of compensation of Rs 2,00,00,000/-, which in our view cannot be justified.”

While recognising that there was a deficiency in service, the court observed that many documents submitted to substantiate the claim were photocopies and could not clearly link the haircut to the alleged professional and emotional losses.

The Supreme Court reduced the compensation to Rs 25 lakh, concluding that awards must reflect actual harm and be supported by reliable evidence. The court emphasised that while consumers have the right to seek redress, claims for large sums, particularly in cases involving emotional distress or career impact, require verifiable proof.