Restaurant Charged Rs 116 As Service Fee, Consumer Commission Awards Rs 31,000

Service charges added to restaurant bills have often raised concern over whether customers can be made to pay them without their consent. While restaurants may charge for the services they provide, consumers can object to a service charge added to their bill without their agreement.

In a recent case, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurugram, has directed a restaurant to refund a 10 per cent service charge levied on a customer’s bill and pay a total of Rs 31,000 as compensation and litigation expenses, along with interest.

Consumer objected to service charge

According to the commission’s order dated September 16, 2026, Hitesh Kumar Gupta had gone for dinner with his family at 21 Gun Salute, an eating outlet of Deneb and Pollux Hotels Pvt. Ltd, in Gurugram on August 14, 2024. After dinner, Gupta received a bill of Rs 1,163, which included Rs 116.30 as a 10 per cent service charge. He objected to the charge and asked the restaurant to remove it, but the request was not accepted.

Gupta subsequently approached the consumer commission by stating that the restaurant had wrongly levied the service charge.

What the commission observed

The commission noted that the invoice clearly showed that Rs 116.30 had been charged as a service charge on the total bill of Rs 1,163.

Referring to the guidelines issued by the Central Consumer Protection Authority, the commission noted that the price of food and beverages offered by a restaurant or hotel already covers the goods and services component. It also noted that charging anything other than the prices displayed in the menu, along with applicable taxes, would amount to an unfair trade practice.

The commission observed, “Thus, from the aforesaid discussions, it becomes crystal clear that the OP in the present case not only committed deficiency in service, but also adopted an unfair trade practice in a blatant violation of the above-mentioned guidelines issued by the Central Consumer Protection Authority under Section 18(2)(1) of the Act.”

The commission accordingly held the restaurant guilty of providing deficient services as well as adopting an unfair trade practice.

Restaurant ordered to pay compensation

The commission accepted the complaint with costs and directed the restaurant to refund the Rs 116.30 service charge to Gupta, along with interest at 9 per cent per annum from August 14, 2024, until realisation. It also directed the restaurant to pay Rs 20,000 to Gupta as compensation for mental harassment, pain and agony, as well as economic loss caused by the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The restaurant was further ordered to pay Rs 11,000 towards litigation expenses.

The restaurant has been directed to comply with the order within 45 days from the date of uploading of the order, after the expiry of 24 hours. If it fails to comply within the stipulated period, the awarded amount will attract interest at 12 per cent per annum until actual realisation.

The commission also said that Gupta would be entitled to file an execution petition under Section 71(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, in case of non-compliance. It noted that the opposite party may also face prosecution under Section 72 of the Act.