January 01, 2026 : The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Belagavi, has held redBus India Pvt. Ltd. and Pauls Travels jointly and severally liable for deficiency in service after a bus breakdown left a family stranded mid-journey, rejecting the defence that the ticketing platform was merely an aggregator.
In its order dated December 31, 2025, the Commission partly allowed Complaint No. 260/2024, directing refund of the ticket amount along with compensation and litigation costs. The Bench comprised President Sri Sanjeev V. Kulkarni and Member Smt. S.S. Kadrollimath. The proceedings were initiated under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 .
The complaint was filed by Ashok Kadam and four family members, who had booked five AC sleeper seats through the redBus platform for travel from Belagavi to Mumbai on February 29, 2024. The journey, operated by Pauls Travels, was scheduled to depart at 10.15 pm and reach Mumbai early the next morning. A total fare of ₹4,380 was paid online and e-tickets were issued.
According to the complainants, the trip was time-sensitive as one family member was required to travel onward to Delhi to participate in a food festival scheduled on March 3, 2024. It was claimed that the delay caused by the breakdown resulted in missing the event and loss of a potential catering opportunity.
During the early hours of March 1, 2024, when the bus was around 40 kilometres from Pune, it reportedly developed an engine failure and stopped near a village bypass. Passengers were informed that repairs could take several hours and no alternative transport was arranged. After waiting through the night, the complainants arranged their own conveyance and reached Mumbai around 1 pm, several hours behind schedule.
The complainants alleged that despite lodging a complaint with redBus, no effective assistance was provided and they were forced to manage the situation on their own. They sought refund of the fare, compensation for mental agony, and damages of ₹5 lakh towards alleged loss of business opportunity.
Pauls Travels remained absent and was proceeded ex parte. redBus contested the complaint, arguing that it functioned only as an online ticketing aggregator and was not responsible for the operation of buses. It relied on its user agreement to deny privity of contract and submitted that a goodwill amount of ₹500 had been offered to the complainants.
Rejecting this defence, the Commission held that the relationship between redBus and Pauls Travels amounted to a tie-up arrangement for providing passenger transport services, thereby creating privity of contract. It observed that merely branding itself as an aggregator could not absolve redBus of responsibility when the service advertised and facilitated through its platform failed. The Commission noted that neither opposite party made any effort to assist stranded passengers, which clearly constituted deficiency in service.
At the same time, the Commission declined to award ₹5 lakh towards alleged business loss, noting that the concerned complainant was not examined and no documentary evidence such as event brochures, invitations, or tender documents was produced. The claim was held to be exaggerated and unsupported by evidence.
Allowing the complaint in part, the Commission directed redBus India Pvt. Ltd. and Pauls Travels to jointly and severally refund ₹4,380 with interest at 8 percent per annum from March 1, 2024 until realization. They were also directed to pay ₹20,000 as compensation for mental agony and suffering, along with ₹5,000 towards litigation costs. The order is to be complied with within 60 days.
Cause Title: Sri Ashok & 4 Ors. v. redBus India Pvt. Ltd. Case No.: Complaint No. 260/2024 Coram: President Sri Sanjeev V. Kulkarni and Member Smt. S.S. Kadrollimath
