Haryana

Karnal

CC/43/2023

Maninder Singh Rana - Complainant(s)

Versus

Madras Cafe - Opp.Party(s)

C.D.Goel

12 Nov 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No.43 of 2023

                                                        Date of instt 18.01.2023

                                                        Date of Decision: 12.11.2024

 

Maninder Singh Rana aged about 32 years son of Shri Bachan Singh, resident of house no.1467-B, Shivaji Colony, Karnal. Aadhar no.3403 5828 2066.

 

                                                                        …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

Madras Cafe, South Indian Restaurant, Main Road, Sector-13, Karnal through its proprietor/partner/authorized Signatory.

 

…..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Shri Jaswant Singh……President.     

              Ms. Neeru Agarwal…….Member

      Ms. Sarvjeet Kaur…..Member

 

Argued by:  Shri C.D. Goel counsel for the complainant.

                    Shri Surinder Sharma, counsel for the OP.

                   

                     (Neeru Agarwal, Member)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that complainant is an Advocate by profession and being is enjoying a good health. On 01.01.2023 at about 6.15 p.m. complainant was interested to eat Masala Dosa, so he reached at the shop of OP for eating the same by seeing/listening reputation and quality of Dosa. Complainant had given an order to OP for serving a Masala Dosa. OP served a Masala Dosa to the complainant through his servicemen/waiter and when half of said Masala Dosa was eaten by the complainant, it was found that there was a (foreign object) i.e. sack Rope piece (Bori ke rassi ka tukra) in the said Masala Dosa. On seeing the said object in the aforesaid Dosa, complainant told about the said foreign object to the servicemen of the OP and thereafter, complainant disclosed the aforesaid incident to the OP, but OP instead of listening the complainant started quarreling with the complainant and OP also threatened the complainant with dire consequences. After that, complainant has taken photograph and video of unhygienic and unhealthy Masala Dosa served by the OP to the complainant in his mobile phone, which still exist in the mobile phone of the complainant. Then OP thrown out the said Dosa in front of the complainant and started putting extreme pressure upon the complainant to make the payment of aforesaid Dosa, then complainant had paid the money of aforesaid Dosa through UPI Transaction. Thereafter, complainant started vomiting by feeling said sack rope piece in his mouth and also felt too much giddiness on eating some of the Dosa and knowing that he has taken some unhygienic Dosa.

2.             It is further averred that OP is having good reputation in the preparation of Dosa item, but from the Dosa served to the complainant, it has been crystal clear that the OP is serving unhealthy and unhygienic item to the public, which are very injurious and unhealthy for the health and life of public at large. However, it is the legal duty of the OP to serve fresh, healthy and hygienic food material to the public at large and by not doing so the OP has committed deficiency in service and played unfair practice and also misbehaved  with the complainant in order to cover-up his own wrongs through illegal means, as such OP is liable to compensate the complainant. Then complainant sent a legal notice dated 03.01.2023 to the OP but it also did not yield any result. Hence, complainant filed the present complaint seeking direction to the OP to refrain its unhygienic activities at their shop and to serve healthy and hygienic food material to its customers, to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as exemplary compensation to the complainant in lieu of serving unhygienic and unhealthy Masala Dosa containing sack rope piece as well as for causing mental harassment, humiliation agony to the complainant and to pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses.

3.             On notice, OP appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action and locus standi. On merits, it is pleaded that OP is running the said café for a long time and is renowned for its best services in the town, as the OP serves best food by keeping in mind the hygiene and keeps the sitting and pantry, kitchen in an apple clean manner and there is no any such complaint from any customer till date. Moreover, the waiter/servicemen always remain spick and span. It is further pleaded that on 01.01.2023, the complainant alongwith his wife visited the shop of OP and ordered for two Masala Dosa. The OP served the best Masala Dosa, however, after sometime, when the complainant ate almost half dosa, he made a complaint that allegedly there is a piece of sack rope in the dosa. The OP shocked and surprised to see that piece of sack rope in the masala, however, OP apologized for the same and requested the complainant to leave that plate of masala dosa and not to eat the same and offered fresh Masala Dosa instead of the same and convinced the complainant that usually there remain no complaint like this and the OP and his staff was also surprised that how and from where that piece of sack rope came in the dosa of the complainant, because the Chef who prepare the Masala dosa keeps a sharp eye and very carefully prepare the same and further while preparing dosa, it remains of a thin layer on the stove and similarly the mix of pototao always put on the said dosa and Chef entire spreads this mix, so had there been any piece of sack rope or anything else, the same comes before the Chef very easily and he remove the same and prepares another food for the customer by throwing the contaminated food. At that time, the complainant was satisfied with the explanation given to the complainant by the OP as well as servicemen and he himself refused to have fresh masala dosa and thereafter, he ate the dosa together with his wife and he paid the price of one dosa which the complainant and his wife had shared and went away. It is wrong to allege that instead of listening the complainant, the OP started quarrelling with the complainant and also threatened the complainant with dire consequences. It is wrong to allege that complainant started vomiting by feeling said sack rope piece in his mouth and also felt too much giddiness on eating of the dosa. The story put forwarded by the complainant is false, frivolous and concocted and afterthought. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint

4.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

5.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, photograph of the Dosa Ex.C1, payment receipt Ex.C2, copy of legal notice dated 03.01.2023 Ex.C3, postal receipt Ex.C4 and closed the evidence on 18.8.2023 by suffering separate statement.

6.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Joginder Singh Ex.OP1/A and closed the evidence on 06.08.2024 by suffering separate statement.

7.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

8.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that the on 01.01.2023, complainant went to the shop of OP and ordered a Masala Dosa and when half of said Masala Dosa was eaten by the complainant, it was found that there was a sack Rope piece  in the said Dosa.  Complainant complaint to the OP but OP instead of listening the complainant started quarreling with the complainant and misbehaved with him. After sometime, complainant started vomiting due to eating the part of Dosa. Thus, the OP has committed deficiency in service and played unfair practice and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

9.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OP, while reiterating the contents of written version has vehemently argued that the OP is running the Café for a very long time and is renowned for its best services. On 01.01.2023, complainant alongwith his wife had visited the shop of the OP and had ordered to two masala dosa. OP served best masala dosa. However, when the complainant ate almost half dosa, he made a complaint allegedly there is a piece of sack rope in the masala dosa. OP apologized for the same and requested the complainant to leave that masala dosa and offered fresh masala dosa. The complainant was satisfied with the explanation given by the OP and himself refused to have fresh dosa. OP never misbehaved with the complainant. The present complaint has been filed only to extort the money from the OP. OP has not charged the cost of the said dosa and only charged the price of one dosa, which was served to the wife of complainant and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

10.           We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

11.           Admittedly, on 01.01.2023, complainant visited the shop of OP and ordered for masala dosa. It is also admitted that the masala dosa served to the complainant was having a piece of sack rope.

12.           Complainant has sought a claim of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation in view of serving unhygienic and unhealthy masala dosa containing piece of sack rope. No doubt, OP has not charged the price of said dosa but the OP cannot escape from their liability for supply of unhygienic and unhealthy dosa. The consumption of contaminated masala dosa by complainant would have been hazardous for his health. The OP is running its shop at such a famous place like Sector-13, Karnal, therefore, it cannot be expected from OP to serve unhygienic food in such a crowded place. The public at large go to such places with the hope that they will be served with better quality of food and they spend much amount for getting hygienic atmosphere.

13.           Hence, in view of the above, it would be justified, if OP is burdened with exemplary costs for serving contemplated food to its customer and for not maintaining proper hygiene. This will also heal the sentiments of the complainant to some extent having been shattered by OP due to his act and conduct and as complainant is fighting against the OP.This view is also supported from the decision of the Hon’ble Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in case of Sameer Bhardwaj (Dr.) Versus Aradhana Soft Drinks Company & Ors. II (2010) CPJ 47 and another decision of Hon’ble Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the case of Moon Beverages Ltd. Versus Vinod Gupta & Ors. II (2010) CPJ 7.

14.         Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the OP to refrain its unhygienic activities at their shop and to serve healthy and hygienic food material to their customers. We further direct the OP to pay Rs.10,000/- as damages in lieu of serving unhygienic and unhealthy masala dosa as well as mental pain, agony and harassment and towards the litigation expenses to the complainant. This order shall be complied within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. It is made clear if the awarded amount is not paid by the OP within stipulated period, then this amount will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till its realization. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Dated: 12.11.2024   

                                                       

                                                                  President,

                                                     District Consumer Disputes

                                                     Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

(Neeru Agarwal)         (Sarvjeet Kaur)

                   Member                          Member