By Smt. PREETHI SIVARAMAN.C, MEMBER
1.Case of the complainant:-
On 28/02/2021 complainant and his family had dinner at Lee Arabia Restaurant at Thodupuzha, the opposite party Hotel. Opposite party had charged and collected an exorbitant amount from complainant for the food items ordered. According to him the normal water bottle which costs only Rs. 13/- (Rupees Thirteen only) and
opposite party collected an excess amount of Rs. 15/- (Rupees Fifteen only) for the same . The normal rate of Parotta and Chapattis are Rs. 10/- (Rupees Ten) per piece and opposite party collected Rs. 15/-(Rupees Fifteen only) per piece. Complainant again stated that opposite party collected an excess amount of Rs.200/-(Rupees Two hundred only) for Alfarm and Rs. 400/-(Rupees Four hundred only) for Butter chicken. When complainant asked about this to opposite party, he shouted to complainant before the other customers. Since the amount is being excess complainant pray for the refund of the excess amount he had paid with compensation and cost. Hence this complaint.
2. Claim of the complainant is that he is entitled to get Rs. 7500/-(Rupees Seven thousand and five hundred only) as the excess amount collected by opposite party from complainant.
3. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party and notice served on him and he did not turn up. Hence opposite party set exparte.
4. In order to substantiate the case of the complainant, he filed an affidavit in lieu of Chief examination and the documents he produced were marked as Ext. A1 to A4. Ext.A1 is the original bill for Rs. 605/- given by opposite party to complainant.Ext.A2 is the original bill for Rs. 990/- given by opposite party to complainant.Ext.A3 is the original bill for Rs. 515/- given by opposite party to complainant. Ext.A4 is the original bill for Rs. 965/- given by opposite party to complainant.
5. The allegations against opposite party is established by complainant from the unchallenged evidence of complainant. There is no contra evidence also in this
matter. But the prayer in the complaint is beyond the jurisdictional limit of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
6. Normally the price of food articles is fixing according to the expenses incurred for making that particular food and the contents used for making that food items. There is no strict guidance to fix the value of food items. As per the reported decision of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in 2012(2) KHC 936 which deals with pricing of food items in Hotels and Restaurants. The main contention of the decisions were that the pricing of food items in hotels and restaurant cannot be regulated by the government or the corporations and it is the absolute discretion of the Restaurants to fix the price of food articles sold by them in the absence of any law authorising them to do so.
7. The above decision Para 6 may be read as follows:-
Price of a food item may depend on various factors. One is the investment that is there for starting up or running the same . The expenditure that is incurred for running an establishment vary from place to place and locality. The quality of food stuff also will necessarily require the caterer to fix a price. Above all there is no compulsion of whatever nature for a person to go and take food from any public eating house , which is not to his taste. A person can avoid a hotel which charges higher prices, if price alone is his concern.
8. The question raised by the complainant regarding the steep hike in price of food articles in hotels and restaurant are of great social importance. But the Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain that aspect. Hence the prayer to refund the exorbitant amount cannot be entertained by this Commission . Hence Complaint dismissed , no cost.
Dated this 13th day of January , 2022.
