The Supreme Court has set aside the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's direction to ITC Maurya to pay Rs 2 crore compensation to a woman whose dream to occupy the top position in modelling could not be fulfilled allegedly due to shoddy hair treatment by ill-trained staff at its saloon.
A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Vikram Nath asked the NCDRC to examine the matter afresh on the issue of the quantum of compensation, saying the consumer panel fell in error by awarding Rs 2 crore compensation without there being any material to substantiate and support the claim.
"What could be quantified was compensation under the head of pain, suffering and trauma. However, amount of Rs 2 crore would be extremely excessive and disproportionate," the bench said.
The court pointed out that the aggrieved consumer here, Aashna Roy, could not produce "any materials regarding her advertising and modelling assignments in the past or for which she had entered into a contract or agreement for the present and future with any of the brands to show her expected loss".
It also noted the NCDRC discussed the importance of hair in a woman's life, but the quantification of compensation has to be based upon material evidence and not on the mere asking.
"We are left with no option but to set aside the order of NCDRC awarding Rs 2 crore as compensation for loss of income, mental breakdown and trauma and pain and suffering. We remit the matter to the NCDRC to give an opportunity to the respondent to lead evidence with respect to her claim of Rs 3 crore," the bench said.
The court set aside the order of September 21, 2021, after hearing senior advocates K V Viswanathan and Debal Kumar Banerji on behalf of ITC Ltd, while Aashna represented the case herself.
In her plea, Aashna had said she went to the salon on April 12, 2018, which she used to visit since 2004, for a "clean and groomed appearance" a week before her interview. She asked for a simple haircut, but her hair was chopped, leaving only four inches from the top.
On her complaint with the management, she was c