On this page
Delhi consumer panel denies Swiggy safe harbor on Dineout 'cost for two' listing, orders Rs 1 lakh joint payout
A Delhi consumer commission on 21 September 2026 ordered Swiggy and Themis Barbeque House to jointly pay Rs 1 lakh, rejecting Swiggy's Section 79 safe harbor defence over a misleading Rs 1,500 'cost for two' Dineout listing. The restaurant must also refund Rs 3,988 and Rs 254.
One email each morning: the day’s top moves in Indian retail, why each matters and what to watch. Free. Stop any time.
The numbers
Figures from Medianama,
| Vegetarian buffet price charged per person: | Rs 1,050 |
|---|---|
| Non-vegetarian buffet price charged per person: | Rs 1,100 |
| Annual interest on refund amounts: | 9% |
| Annual interest if deadline missed: | 12% |
| Payment deadline: | four weeks |
Why it matters to operators and investors
If you list on Dineout or any aggregator, the 'cost for two' figure and service charge disclosures are your exposure too: a Delhi commission made the restaurant refund Rs 3,988 plus Rs 254 service charge at 9% interest within four weeks, so audit listed prices against actual billing now.
What to watch next
- Whether Swiggy files an appeal and whether the higher forum stays the order
- Confirmation that the Rs 3,988 refund and Rs 254 service charge refund were paid with 9% interest within four weeks
- Visible changes to 'cost for two' wording or disclaimers on Dineout listings
- New consumer complaints or commission orders that cite this ruling against other platforms
- Any consumer-regulator notice or advisory on price indicators on dining platforms
Likely next moves
Our read of what comes next — analysis, not reported by the source.
- Swiggy is likely to challenge the order on appeal, focusing on the rejection of its Section 79 safe harbor defence rather than the Rs 1 lakh sum.
- Themis Barbeque House is likely to refund Rs 3,988 and Rs 254 in service charge with 9% interest within the four-week deadline, or it may seek a stay.
- Swiggy may revise how Dineout presents 'cost for two' figures, for example with 'approximate' labels or periodic checks against restaurant menus, to weaken similar claims.
- Rival dining and reservation platforms are likely to review their own price-indicator language and merchant contracts after the ruling.
- Swiggy may seek to push more liability for listing accuracy onto partner restaurants through contract terms, and the commission's joint-payment order makes that a live issue.
The source
First seen