A consumer commission in Andhra Pradesh has held Ola liable for the misconduct of one of its drivers and directed the company to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation to a woman passenger who was left stranded on a highway while on her way to appear for the Andhra Pradesh Junior Civil Judge Mains Examination.
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kurnool, partly allowed the complaint filed by Ullaji Chennamma and ordered Ola to pay Rs 50,000 towards compensation for mental agony, emotional distress and hardship, along with Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs.
Details of the Incident
As per the complaint, Chennamma had booked an Ola Auto on October 11, 2025 at 7:08 am from Pottur Vari Thota, Guntur, to Acharya Nagarjuna University, accompanied by her mother, to appear for a judicial mains examination. The driver who arrived came in a vehicle bearing a different registration number from the vehicle shown in the Ola app. Despite this discrepancy, the driver insisted on sharing the OTP before commencing the ride.
Instead of taking the correct route, the driver deliberately diverted and took the complainant nearly 25 kilometres away from her destination. He then stopped on the Narasaraopet–Guntur Road at Sitaram Nagar and demanded additional payment to drop her at the correct location. When she refused, he abandoned the complainant and her mother at a different location at 7:28 am, forcing her to cancel the ride against her will, the complaint further added.
Consumer Court's Observations
"This Commission cannot ignore the fact that the complainant was proceeding to attend a highly competitive judicial mains examination, which required mental composure, punctuality, and emotional stability. Leaving a woman candidate and her mother stranded on a public road under such circumstances undoubtedly caused immense mental agony, fear, inconvenience, humiliation, and emotional distress," the commission said.
Ola argued that it merely operates an online platform connecting independent third-party drivers to customers and therefore cannot be held responsible for the driver's misconduct. The company further added that no payment was collected and that it had, as a precautionary measure, suspended the driver and off-boarded the vehicle after the complaint was raised.
Platform Responsibility
While rejecting this defence, the commission held that merely describing itself as an 'online platform' does not absolve the opposite party from its responsibility towards consumers who avail services through its application. "Merely describing itself as an 'online platform' does not absolve the Opposite Party from its responsibility towards consumers who avail services through its application. Once the service was booked and commenced through the platform operated by the Opposite Party, the latter owed a duty of care and responsibility to ensure reasonable safety, reliability, and accountability in the service rendered through its associated drivers," the commission further noted.
The commission also added that Ola's own action of suspending the driver worked against its defence as "Such action on the part of the opposite party itself indicates that there was substance in the grievance raised by the complainant and that the conduct of the driver was improper."
Compensation and Directions
On the question of compensation, the commission found the complainant's claimed amount of Rs 5,00,000 excessive but awarded Rs 50,000, further noting that "the mental agony, inconvenience, emotional distress, and the anxiety caused to the complainant at a crucial stage of her examination" justified the award and said the order must be complied with within 45 days of receipt.
"Ola should implement and maintain stricter internal monitoring and verification mechanisms to curb such unfair and negligent practices by drivers operating through its platform, so as to safeguard the interests and safety of consumers," the commission concluded.
