Tamil Nadu Man Wins Consumer Court Case Over Missing Pickle In Food Parcels

In a notable legal case from Villupuram district in Tamil Nadu, Arogyaswamy from Valuthareddy successfully secured compensation from a restaurant owner for failing to include pickles in food parcels ordered for a charitable event.

Villupuram (Tamil Nadu): In a significant ruling, Arogyaswamy from Valudareddy, Villupuram district, successfully secured compensation from a restaurant owner for failing to include pickles in food parcels ordered for a charitable event. Arogyaswamy, who serves as the state president of the All Consumers Public Environmental Welfare Association, decided to honour the first anniversary of his cousin Nesam's passing by distributing food to 25 elderly individuals on November 28, 2022. The day prior, he visited Balamurugan restaurant near Villupuram New Bus Station to enquire about meal prices. The restaurant quoted Rs 70 for a meal and Rs 80 for a parcel, providing a written quotation.

Satisfied with the terms, Arogyaswamy paid Rs. 2,000 upfront for 25 food parcels at Rs 80 each. The following day, he collected the food parcels from the restaurant and requested a receipt. However, the restaurant owner only provided a handwritten note and refused to issue the original receipt.

Upon distributing the food to the elderly, Arogyaswamy discovered that the parcels were missing pickles, an essential accompaniment to the meals. He promptly returned to the restaurant to address the issue. The restaurant owner, after consulting with his staff, confirmed that the pickle had been omitted. Arogyaswamy requested a refund of Rs 25 for the missing pickle packets, priced at Rs 1 each. The restaurant owner refused to comply.

Feeling aggrieved, Arogyaswamy filed a complaint with the Villupuram District Consumer Grievance Committee. The case was heard by Chairman Satish Kumar and Members Meeramoideen and Amala. After considering the arguments from both sides, the committee ruled in favour of Arogyaswamy.

In their judgment, the committee stated that the restaurant's failure to include the pickle constituted a deficiency in service. They ordered the restaurant owner to compensate Arogyaswamy with Rs 30,000 for the distress caused, Rs 5,000 for litigation expenses, Rs 25 for the missing pickle, and to provide the original receipt for the purchase. The restaurant owner was given 45 days to comply with the order. Failure to do so would result in an additional penalty with an interest rate of 9% per month.