Gaurav Pathak2 days ago
- copy link
Wedding photos and videos hold a lot of emotional value. They play an invaluable role in preserving memories for generations. Now that wedding photography packages are costing lakhs, it has become very important to understand consumer rights in this area.
legal remedy Any person hiring photography services is a consumer under Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Section 2(11) defines a deficiency which causes loss to the consumer. The law recognizes both offline and online transactions and complaints can be filed electronically with consumer commissions within two years of the incident. Photography services fall within the definition of “services” envisaged under Section 2(42) of the Act. contractual obligations Consumer forums emphasize the importance of clear contracts in photography services. The Chandigarh State Commission in Sakshi Kumar vs. Rana Gurtej Singh (2018) held that even though time may not be of the essence in a photography contract, photographers must complete the work within a reasonable time. The contract should clearly state the deliverables (number of photos, editing required and delivery format). The Commission observed that selection of photographs is an individual matter and photographers cannot be expected to shortlist photographs on their own as they are not aware of the invitees’ affiliation with the wedding family. In this case, the Commission also protected the rights of the photographer if he followed the proper procedure and distributed the edited photos as per the contract. Data Loss and Backup A major concern is the loss of wedding photographs due to technical failures. In the case Satyam Gurung vs. Samden Yolmo (2024), the West Bengal State Commission awarded compensation of Rs 10 lakh when a photographer claimed that a hard disk containing wedding photographs was damaged by lightning. The Commission said that professional photographers should take appropriate security measures for equipment and data backup. Complainants must prove claims of technical failures with evidence such as expert reports or forensic analysis. The Commission said that being professional photographers, there should have been proper arrangements to prevent such data loss. In such cases, mere return of the advance amount does not absolve the photographers of their responsibility. on time delivery Jagdish Chandra Sharma vs. R.K. In the Verma (2005) case, the Delhi State Commission considered a case in which the photographer had not delivered the wedding album for five years. The Commission said that “A photo album of one’s daughter’s wedding ceremony has sentimental value and its significance can never be lost as it preserves memories for posterity.” The photographer was directed to deliver the album and the pending payment was seized. Similarly, in the case of P. Muralikrishnudu vs Varikalla Srinivas (2016) when the photographer failed to deliver the album on time as promised despite taking 85% advance payment, the District Forum Ordered to refund the amount with interest. quality standard Photographers have more responsibilities than just the quantity of photos. Photographers must deliver edited photographs as per the promised quality standards. In the Satyam Gurung case, sharing unedited photos through Google Drive was not considered sufficient. The Commission noted that both quantity and quality matter in wedding photography contracts.
protect your rights Given the importance of preserving memories, consumers should obtain a detailed written contract that outlines deliverables, timelines, and quality standards. The contract should also specify backup procedures, needs for edited photos, and alternative arrangements in case of technical failures. The consumer must keep records of all communications and payments. Consumer commissions have consistently awarded adequate compensation in wedding photography cases. Although monetary compensation cannot completely compensate for the emotional loss, it can still help ease the pain of losing precious memories. (The author is also Secretary, CASC.)
