For bad hostel food student gets 5k compensation

Published 17 July 2026 · local

Kangra district consumer commission order Total amount awarded (excluding interest) Refund: Rs 30,000 Compensation: Rs 5,000 Litigation costs: Rs 5,000 An engineering student studying in

Kangra district consumer commission order Total amount awarded (excluding interest) Refund: Rs 30,000 Compensation: Rs 5,000 Litigation costs: Rs 5,000 An engineering student studying in Greater Noida recently won a refund of Rs 30,000 with 9% interest, along with compensation, after the Kangra District Consumer Commission held a hostel authority liable for sub-standard food and inadequate maintenance.The judgement came in a case filed by Mr Rawat from Doonga Bazaar, Kangra (Himachal Pradesh. According to the submission, Rawat moved to Noida, Uttar Pradesh, to pursue B.Tech at IILM University, Greater Noida. On August 17, 2023, when he joined the first semester, he booked accommodation in a hostel in Knowledge Park-III run by a reputed chain and paid an advance of Rs 35,000 to the hostel on the same day.The hostel issued a receipt (no. 655) for room No.M-113 (AC), which was duly signed by their authorised signatory. They assured Rawat of various top-tier facilities, including quality food, working Wi-Fi, and regular maintenance services, which influenced the complainant's (Rawat's) decision to choose their accommodation.However, during the first week of his stay, Rawat faced severe deficiencies.

The food provided was sub-standard, maintenance was neglected, and the promised Wi-Fi facility/password was never shared.Unhappy with these deficiencies, Rawat decided to leave the hostel on August 23, 2023. He informed the hostel's manager about the poor food quality and inadequate maintenance and sought to discontinue his stay. The manager verbally, as per Rawat, assured him that the advance payment would be refunded after deducting the charges for the one-week stay. However, despite repeated follow-ups and phone calls, the hostel did not issue the promised refund.After waiting for a considerable amount of time, Rawat decided to seek legal help. However, due to his studies and other responsibilities, he took some time and filed the case on September 27, 2025, with the Kangra District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission in Dharamshala. The final order was issued in his favour on June 25, 2026. Advocate Aniket Thakur represented Rawat in the district commission.Kangra consumer commission's President Hemanshu Mishra and members Arti Sood and Narayan Thakur heard Rawat's case and ordered the hostel to refund an amount of Rs 30,000 along with 9% interest per annum from the date of complaint till its realisation.

In addition, they also directed the hostel to pay a compensation of Rs 5,000, along with litigation costs of Rs 5,000.Keep reading to know how Rawat won the case.The Kangra district consumer commission said that despite sending notices to the hostel, they chose not to send any representative to the hearings, so the matter would proceed e parte, and the evidence presented by Rawat stands unrebutted, unchallenged, and uncontroverted.The district consumer commission said: "There is no reason to disbelieve the cogent, credible, and convincing documentary evidence placed on record."The Kangra district consumer commission said that the receipt given as evidence by Rawat conclusively establishes that the hostel collected a substantial advance of Rs 35,000 and when it accepted such upfront commercial charges while failing to provide basic, habitable amenities like palatable food and internet connectivity constitutes a classic case of deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act.Thus, the Kangra district consumer commission said that since Rawat was compelled to vacate the premises within one week due to the uninhabitable conditions, the hostel is legally and equitably bound to refund the balance amount after deducting reasonable charges for a seven-day stay.Order: "In the interest of equity and justice, a deduction of Rs 5,000 for the one-week stay is deemed appropriate, leaving a refundable principal balance of Rs 30,000.