District Consumer Commission Rules in Favor of Consumer in Missing Pickle Case
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Villupuram, Tamil Nadu, recently delivered a verdict in a peculiar case involving the absence of pickle in a food order, ruling in favor of the consumer.
The case dates back to November 28, 2022, when C. Arokiasamy placed an order for 25 parcel meals from Hotel Balamurugan for a relative’s first death anniversary ceremony. The order, amounting to ₹2,000, was expected to include pickle among other items. However, upon the food’s arrival, Arokiasamy was dismayed to discover that the pickle was missing, causing embarrassment in front of his guests.
The Commission delved into key legal issues, including the purchase of the 25 meals and the payment of ₹2,000, as well as the entitlement of the complainant to a refund for the missing pickle and the identification of deficiency in service by the opposite party. Subsequently, the Commission made the following determinations:
- The complainant indeed purchased 25 meals and paid ₹2,000, as substantiated by relevant documents and GST records.
- In light of the missing pickle, the complainant is entitled to a refund of ₹25.
- The Commission found the opposite party to be at fault for deficiency in service by failing to furnish the pickle and issue a proper bill.
In light of these findings, the Commission issued a set of directives to Hotel Balamurugan, which include the following:
- Reimbursement of ₹25 for the missing pickle
- Issuance of a computerized bill for the purchase
- Payment of ₹30,000 as compensation for deficiency in service and the mental agony caused
- Settlement of ₹5,000 as litigation costs
The total amount to be paid by the hotel stands at ₹35,025.
The Commission highlighted the significance of the case, stating, “The act of the opposite party of not delivering pickles for 25 meals, and also not issuing a receipt for the purchase of meals for Rs. 2000/-, amounts to deficiency in service. Due to the act of the opposite party, the complainant’s suffered mental agony, which is also deemed acceptable.” Further emphasizing the importance of proper billing, the court expressed concern over the failure of the opposite party to issue a bill for the purchase of 25 meals, further indicating a clear instance of deficiency in service.
This ruling serves as a reminder to businesses regarding the importance of upholding commitments and ensuring the provision of services as agreed upon, thereby upholding the interests of consumers and maintaining high service standards.
For those interested in accessing the full order and judgement, it is available for review and download.
