Ola in HC against summons in criminal case accusing it of overcharging

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Mar 12 2018 | 9:25 PM IST
The Delhi High Court today sought the response of an NGO on Ola cabs' plea for quashing the criminal complaint against it and the summons issued to it to appear as an accused in the matter.
The NGO Nyaya Bhoomi had sought recovery of Rs 91,000 crore from app-based taxi service providers for allegedly overcharging passengers.
Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva issued the notice to the NGO and sought its response by August 20 on the plea of ANI Technologies, which provides app-based taxi services under the name of Ola.
The company has challenged the summons issued to it on July 31 last year by a metropolitan magistrate for the violation of provisions of the Motor Vehicles (MV) Act by allegedly operating taxis without a licence and charging excess fares from passengers.
The trial court had also summoned as accused Uber India and Serendipity Infolabs Pvt Ltd, which runs Taxi For Sure.
Ola, in its plea, has claimed that the trial court order was without any legal or factual basis as till date the Delhi government has not come out with a scheme to regulate the running of app-based taxi services.
It has also said in its petition that a bill to amend the MV Act to regulate aggregators like it was before the Lok Sabha and the operations of such entities was already being looked into by the high court in another matter.
The Delhi High Court in August 2016 had directed that after August 22, 2016, taxi aggregators/ operators shall not charge fare more than the cap stipulated in the Delhi government's June 2013 notification.
The trial court in its order had noted that excess fares have been charged by the companies in violation of the MV Act, June 20, 2013 notification as well as city taxi service scheme.
The NGO, in its plea, had also sought recovery of a whopping Rs 91,000 crore from the cab service providers for allegedly not adhering to rules relating to fares and not operating by meters.
It had also sought recovery of an additional penalty of Rs 26,000 crore from the firms and jail term for them.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Mar 12 2018 | 9:25 PM IST

Next Story