NEW DELHI: A Telangana district consumer commission, in an order dated July 16, held a photography studio liable for deficiency in service after it failed to deliver all the promised birthday photos and instead provided AI-generated images. The commission held that the studio failed to provide the services it had promised, causing mental agony on such ocassion.Why did the customer approach the consumer commission?According to the commission’s order, the complainant booked a pre-birthday photoshoot for his son with KSH Photography on January 28, 2026. The studio agreed to provide photographs in 15 different themes for Rs 13,500. The complainant then paid Rs 2,500 in advance and the remaining Rs 9,000 after the photoshoot was completed on February 1, 2026. The studio had promised to deliver all the photographs by February 6.However, the complainant alleged that the studio delivered only 14 incomplete themes instead of the promised 15. He said he needed the photographs for banners and donation activities planned for his son’s birthday on February 11, but despite repeated phone calls and messages, the studio did not respond.He further alleged that when the photographs were finally shared, many of them were AI-generated instead of the original photographs he had paid for. When he asked the studio to provide the original photos or refund his money, it failed to do so. He then approached the consumer commission seeking a refund and compensation.The studio did not appear before the commission or file its reply despite receiving notice. It was therefore proceeded against ex parte.Why did the commission rule against the photography studio?The bench comprising President Chitneni Latha Kumariand members Madhavi Sasanakota and Kathyayani Khandavilli found that the booking sheet, WhatsApp messages and emails showed the studio had agreed to provide 15 themed photographs for Rs 13,500 but failed to deliver one of the promised themes. It also noted that the remaining photographs provided were AI-generated.“The WhatsApp communication categorically discloses that the Opposite Party failed to provide one chair theme and remaining also AI themes. Despite repeated requests by the complainant, the Opposite Party failed to provide promised shoot themes,” the commission observed.The commission further observed that the studio failed to provide the promised service within the agreed time despite repeated requests from the customer. It noted that the photographs were required for the child’s birthday celebrations and that the delay caused embarrassment and mental agony to the family. Since the studio chose not to contest the case, the customer’s allegations remained unchallenged.“The WhatsApp communication clearly reveals that due to the negligence or omission of providing promised duty of themes to the complainant within agreed date amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party,” the bench noted.The commission, however, declined to order a full refund because the studio had provided most of the photographs. It said compensation, rather than a refund, would be appropriate in the facts of the case.“As such birthday event could not be repeated in life… awarding an amount of Rs 5,000 towards compensation is reasonable as the complainant paid Rs 13,500 as consideration to get the services from the Opposite Party and except one theme, Opposite Party provided remaining themes,” the bench added.Holding the studio guilty of deficiency in service, the commission directed it to pay Rs 5,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 3,000 towards litigation costs within 45 days.
