New Delhi: The issue of parking fee collection by shopping malls and multiplexes in India has once again come under sharp public and legal scrutiny. A matter that has simmered for over a decade through consumer complaints, state policies, and judicial interventions is now at a pivotal point.
On April 10, 2025, the Hon’ble High Court passed a significant interim order suspending G.O.Ms. No. 44 dated 24.03.2025, issued by the Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department of Andhra Pradesh. The order had attempted to prohibit or severely restrict the right of private commercial establishments such as malls and multiplexes from charging parking fees.
This new development has the potential to significantly impact previous rulings, including the March 31, 2025, verdict by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in Chennai (North) against VR Mall, which declared the collection of parking fees as an “unfair trade practice”.
For the Indian shopping centre industry, which incurs substantial infrastructure and operational costs in managing secure, well-lit, and tech-enabled parking spaces, these rulings pose a fundamental challenge.
Why parking fees matter for malls
Parking in large commercial establishments is not merely a side service but a core part of the consumer experience. Malls must deploy round-the-clock security, surveillance systems, valet services, maintenance personnel, and real-time traffic monitoring technologies to ensure seamless access and safety for visitors.
Without a parking fee, there is genuine concern that non-shoppers and non-cinema-goers may exploit the free space, leaving actual patrons without parking and burdening mall operations.
Furthermore, mall developers argue that the parking areas, though part of building plans, are not public infrastructure funded by municipal authorities. They are private investments made to improve the overall shopping experience, and thus, charging a nominal fee for regulated access is not only justified but also essential.
A patchwork of precedents: Judicial viewpoints
Over the years, courts across the country have issued mixed rulings on this contentious issue, often influenced by local laws, byelaws, and case-specific evidence. Below are some of the landmark cases and the malls/multiplexes involved:
VR Mall, Chennai
On March 31, 2025, the Chennai North District Consumer Forum ruled that VR Mall’s practice of charging parking fees was an unfair trade practice. The case was filed by V. Arun Kumar, who paid ₹80 for parking his two-wheeler for under two hours. The forum directed the mall to cease fee collection and awarded ₹12,000 as compensation and litigation costs. However, this ruling may be revisited in light of the April 10 High Court stay on G.O.Ms. No. 44, which could supersede local orders.
GVK One Mall, Hyderabad
In the case of Vijay Gopal v. GVK One Mall, the complainant challenged the legitimacy of paid parking. The consumer court acknowledged a deficiency in service by the mall but declined to act against municipal authorities. The case highlighted operational ambiguities and partial judicial acceptance.
Pacific Mall, Delhi
The Delhi High Court upheld Pacific Mall’s right to collect parking fees. The court held that the practice did not violate local building byelaws and was permissible under the terms of land use. The South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) was involved, having previously issued notices to private establishments.
Lulu Mall, Kochi
The Kerala High Court questioned the legality of Lulu International Mall charging parking fees. The case, led by petitioners Bosco Louis and Pauly Vadakkan, alleged statutory violations of the Kerala Municipality Act. The court allowed the mall to collect fees temporarily, but at its own risk, pending a final verdict.
Select Citywalk & Ambience Mall, Delhi
In 2019, a plea was filed in the Delhi High Court named Select Citywalk (Saket) and Ambience Mall (Vasant Kunj) for violating the Master Plan for Delhi 2021, which prohibited parking fees in certain commercial zones. The SDMC claimed that parking in such spaces must be free. However, enforcement remained weak.
Gujarat High Court: State-wide Precedent
In 2019, the Gujarat High Court ruled that malls and multiplexes across the state are under a statutory obligation to provide free parking, as mandated by local town planning laws. Further, it also suggested that the first hour should be free.
Karnataka High Court
In 2023, the Karnataka High Court refused to entertain a plea demanding free parking at malls. The bench observed, “Somebody incurs a cost for maintaining the parking space at a cinema hall. How can it be free?”
Interpretative differences across India
The ambiguity and contradictions in rulings are largely driven by:
- Statutory obligations under local building codes
- Permissibility of commercial usage of a parking space under land allotment terms
- Municipal vs private regulation overlap
- Consumer protection interpretation under the Consumer Protection Act
Some courts have favored consumers by interpreting parking as a statutory amenity, while others have accepted the developer’s right to monetize infrastructure provided they adhere to the legal and zoning conditions.
Consumer court precedents
Consumer forums have, in several instances, ruled that collecting parking fees when mandated to provide it free under building laws constitutes “unfair trade practice.” Compensation amounts have ranged from ₹10,000 to ₹15,000 per case, depending on the impact on the consumer.
However, these are often isolated district-level rulings that vary widely by jurisdiction, and many are not upheld on appeal.
Conclusion: The debate continues
The question, “Can malls collect parking fees?”, does not yet have a clear, nationwide answer. The April 10, 2025, interim High Court order suspending Andhra Pradesh’s attempt to ban parking fees reflects the judiciary’s recognition of the economic and operational reality of large commercial establishments.
While consumer rights must be protected, the rights of mall owners and cinema operators to manage and maintain their infrastructure sustainably also deserve legal recognition. Parking is not a static, passive facility – it’s a dynamic service, involving staffing, safety, technology, and accountability.
What India needs is a unified, well-defined policy framework – one that balances fair consumer access with commercial sustainability. Until then, the legal rollercoaster around mall parking fees is likely to continue.
