Ludhiana: The district consumer disputes redressal commission, Ludhiana, has imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 on a restaurant after holding it guilty of deficiency in service. The order came in response to a complaint filed by Balram Singh, an advocate at the district courts, Ludhiana, who alleged that he suffered harm to his teeth due to the food served to him. The commission directed that the composite cost of Rs 10,000 be paid to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the restaurant would be liable to pay interest at 8% per annum from the date of complaint until actual payment.According to the complaint, on April 5, 2023, Balram Singh visited the restaurant for lunch along with his friend Gautam Chopra and two other associates. After the food was served, the complainant began eating and soon noticed that the taste of the food was below average. While chewing a butter naan, he allegedly encountered a plastic object embedded in it. The plastic reportedly stuck to his teeth. When he brought the issue to the notice of the restaurant staff, they initially denied it was plastic, claiming it was part of the food. However, after objections from the complainant, the staff eventually admitted their fault.The complainant attempted to meet the owner of the restaurant, but the owner did not come forward to speak with him. Later, the manager and chef issued a written apology. The complainant alleged that soon afterward, restaurant staff demanded excessive charges for the food, and when he refused to pay, they misbehaved and abused him and his friends. He ultimately paid Rs 2,625, including GST, which he described as an illegal amount. He further stated that the food caused swelling in his mouth, due to which he could neither eat nor talk for many days and had to undergo medical treatment.A legal notice was served by the complainant on June 13, 2023, but despite receiving it, the opposite parties did not resolve the issue or settle his claim. He stated that he suffered mental tension and harassment because of the restaurant’s deficiency in service and sought Rs 2 lakh as compensation.When the commission issued a notice, neither the owner nor the chef appeared, and they were proceeded against ex-parte. The complaint against the manager was dismissed as withdrawn. After examining the evidence, the commission held that the complainant’s right to safety had been infringed. It concluded that acts and omissions of the owner and chef caused physical harm, mental agony, and shock to the complainant, amounting to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The commission ordered both to pay a composite cost of Rs 10,000 within 30 days.
