DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Pay Rs 10K to woman for worm in meal, panel tells eatery

Ramkrishan Upadhyay Chandigarh, September 16 It is the duty of a restaurant to serve safe and hygienic food to its customers, and any deviation from this standard can be considered a breach of its duty, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal...
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

Ramkrishan Upadhyay

Advertisement

Chandigarh, September 16

Advertisement

It is the duty of a restaurant to serve safe and hygienic food to its customers, and any deviation from this standard can be considered a breach of its duty, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, observed today.

The commission has directed Chili’s restaurant, Elante Mall, to pay a city resident — Ranjot Kaur — Rs 10,000 as compensation for causing her mental agony by allegedly serving her unhygienic food.

Advertisement

Besides, the commission has directed the eatery to deposit Rs 10,000 into the Consumer Legal Aid Account and asked it to cough up an additional Rs 5,000 to cover the complainant’s legal expenses. The restaurant has also been directed to refund the charge of the meal (Rs 852.75) to the complainant.

Kaur claimed to have found a worm in the meal served to her by the restaurant on September 14, 2020. She was quick to bring the matter to the attention of the restaurant manager.

The restaurant, however, disputed Kaur’s claim in its reply, insisting that the meal had been properly cooked and served to her.

After hearing the arguments, the commission said that the contents of the DDR filed in connection with the matter reveal that the matter was reported to the police.

The complainant pointed out that the Opposite Party (OP), ie the restaurant, had not even handed her the bill and that she had to seek help from the police.

“In the present case, the presence of a live worm in the complainant’s food clearly indicates that it is a failure on the part of the restaurant to meet its duties,” the commission noted in its order.

It was due to the “inactive attitude” of the OP that the complainant approached the police and later the commission for the redressal of her grievance, it added.

Not serving safe food to its customers and not providing proper services proves a deficiency in services on the part of the OP, the commission stated.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Classifieds tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper