District Commission Order Against Cab Aggregator for Unjust Cancellation Fee After Driver Refused AC
Parties: Nitin Saxena v. Uber India Systems Pvt. Ltd.
The complainant booked a cab from Bandra to Mumbai Airport. Upon boarding, the driver refused to switch on the air conditioning unless the passenger paid ₹100 extra in cash. When the complainant objected, the driver forced him out and cancelled the trip. The aggregator's algorithm immediately charged the passenger a ₹53 cancellation fee. The complainant's in-app dispute was repeatedly rejected by automated chatbots.
The District Commission held Uber India Systems vicariously liable for the actions of drivers operating under its commercial platform. The forum held that charging fares for AC transit while delivering non-AC service constitutes deficiency under Section 2(11) CPA 2019, and levying a cancellation fee on a victim of driver refusal amounts to unfair trade practice. Uber was directed to refund the ₹53 cancellation fee, pay ₹10,000 compensation for mental harassment and missing connecting flight stress, and ₹5,000 in litigation costs.