The commission noted the complainant needed the photographs for banners and donation activities planned for his son's birthday, an occasion that could not be repeated (AI-generated image).A district consumer commission in Telangana recently held a photography studio guilty of deficiency in service after it allegedly failed to deliver promised photoshoot themes and instead handed over AI-generated images to a Hyderabad man ahead of his son’s birthday in 2026. The commission directed the studio to pay Rs 8,000 as compensation and litigation costs. President Chitneni Latha Kumari, along with members Madhavi Sasanakota and Kathyayani Khandavilli, were hearing the complaint filed by a man who allegedly booked a pre-birthday photoshoot for his son from a local photography studio in January 2026.The July 16 order read that “despite repeated requests by the complainant, the opposite party (photography studio) failed to provide promised shoot themes. The action of non-providing promised services to the complainant attracts the definition of deficiency in service enshrined under Sec.2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act.”Man’s ordeal over missing themesThe man approached the photography studio on January 28 for a pre-birthday shoot ahead of his son’s birthday, which was to be celebrated on February 11. The studio allegedly agreed to provide 15 themed shoots for Rs 13,500. He paid Rs 2,500 in advance the same day, and the shoot took place on February 1, after which he paid Rs 9,000.According to the complaint, the studio had agreed to deliver all 15 themes by February 6, but the man alleged that he received only 14 themes. He argued that he needed the photographs for banners and donation activities planned for the birthday, and despite repeated calls and messages, the studio allegedly failed to respond, causing him mental agony and embarrassment on the occasion.When the studio finally sent photographs after repeated requests, the complainant alleged he was shocked to find they were AI-generated rather than the originals he had paid for. He then demanded either the original photographs or a refund, but the studio allegedly failed to comply, prompting him to approach the commission.The photography studio was served notice on April 15, 2026, but did not file a written version within the statutory 30-day period or the extended 15-day discretionary period, and was consequently set ex-parte. The man filed an affidavit along with other relevant documents, including the booking sheet and payment details, extracts of WhatsApp messages and emails, Google reviews, and his Aadhar card.Story continues below this adThe commission noted that the WhatsApp communication categorically disclosed that the photography studio failed to provide one chair theme and gave AI-generated themes for the rest, despite repeated requests by the man. Since the studio neither appeared nor contested the case, the commission held the allegations against it went unrebutted.While the man had sought a full refund of Rs 11,500, the commission found no justification for a complete refund since the studio had delivered the photographs, barring one theme. It observed that there is no hard and fast rule to decide the quantum of compensation in cases of mental agony, especially since the birthday event could not be repeated in the man’s life, but noted he had not furnished documentary proof of monetary loss such as salary slips.The commission, therefore, ordered the photography studio to pay Rs 5,000 to the man as compensation and Rs 3,000 as litigation cost.TakeawayA service provider cannot substitute AI-generated content for the original deliverables it was paid to produce and expect to escape liability merely by staying away from the proceedings. Consumers are entitled to compensation for deficiency in service even without quantifiable financial loss, particularly where the service concerned a one-time, unrepeatable occasion.Story continues below this adFor consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states and union territories (Telangana: 1800-4250-0333) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.(Written by Avinash Verma; Avinash is an Intern with the Indian Express)Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express (Digital), where he specialises in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish covers court developments and key cases for the audience. Expertise Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. His work at The Indian Express focuses on translating the often-dense proceedings of courts into clear, legal content. He also runs liveblogs from the Supreme Court and various High Courts. Industry Experience: With over 5 years in the field, Ashish has contributed to several niche legal and professional platforms, honing his ability to communicate complex information. His previous experience includes: Lawsikho: Gaining insights into legal education and practical law. Verdictum: Focusing on high-quality legal news and court updates. Enterslice: Working at the intersection of legal, financial, and advisory services. ... Read More