Supreme Court Reduces Compensation in Model's Haircut Case, Emphasizes Evidence-Based Damages
The Supreme Court of India has significantly reduced the compensation awarded to a model in a high-profile case involving an allegedly faulty haircut, slashing the amount from Rs 2 crore to Rs 25 lakh. The court emphasized that damages cannot be awarded based on mere whims or presumptions, especially when claims involve substantial sums like crores of rupees.
Background of the Case and Initial Rulings
The case originated when the complainant, a management post-graduate from IIM Calcutta with a diploma in Mass Communication, approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). She alleged a deficiency in service by a salon run by ITC Limited at Hotel ITC Maurya in Delhi on April 12, 2018. The model claimed that despite her specific instructions for long flicks or layers, the hairstylist trimmed approximately 4 inches of her hair, leading to mental trauma, depression, anxiety, and loss of job opportunities.
In 2021, the NCDRC awarded her a compensation of Rs 2 crore, citing permanent scalp damage from chemical treatments and severe mental breakdown due to the salon's negligence. However, this decision was challenged by ITC Limited in an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court's Rationale for Reducing Compensation
A bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan heard the appeal and delivered a ruling on February 6, 2026. The court upheld the NCDRC's finding of deficiency in service but set aside the compensation amount, noting a lack of reliable evidence to justify such a high award. The Supreme Court observed that damages must be based on trustworthy and reliable evidence, not on the complainant's whims or fancies.
The court highlighted that the model had produced photocopies of documents, such as loss of job and modelling assignments, and a doctor's certificate for mental trauma. However, these documents were denied by ITC Limited, with some having dates before the haircut incident, raising questions about their authenticity. The Supreme Court stated that loss cannot be established merely by producing photocopies, and the commission's justification that the woman may not have maintained originals due to trauma was insufficient for awarding huge compensation.
Legal Proceedings and Evidence Issues
In the first round of litigation, the Supreme Court in February 2023 upheld the deficiency of service finding but remanded the case back to the NCDRC to decide compensation after examining evidence. Initially, the model claimed Rs 3 crore, but this was increased to Rs 5.20 crore upon remand. ITC Limited argued that the documents produced were dim, illegible, or mere photocopies, and sought to cross-examine the woman, which was denied in earlier proceedings.
The corporation contended that the amount claimed was imaginary, with no actual loss suffered, and pointed to CCTV footage showing the model entering and exiting the salon satisfied. The Supreme Court agreed, noting that the quantification of compensation must be based on material evidence, not mere asking, and that the model had not proven the authenticity of her documents despite opportunities.
Model's Arguments and Final Ruling
The complainant argued that her prosperous career was derailed due to the haircut, as hair style relates to confidence for managerial jobs, movies, or modelling assignments. She claimed running from pillar to post for seven years without adequate compensation and criticized the corporation for not challenging her documents earlier. However, the Supreme Court found these arguments insufficient to justify the high compensation.
In its final order, the Supreme Court partially allowed the appeal, modifying the compensation from Rs 2 crore to Rs 25 lakh. The ruling underscores the principle that in consumer disputes, especially those involving large claims, evidence must be concrete and verifiable to award damages, preventing arbitrary or whimsical awards based on unsubstantiated allegations.
