Food Poisoning: Kerala Consumer Forum Directs Bakery To Pay Rs.50,000 Compensation To Family

The Bench comprising President D B Binu and Members Ramachandran V and Sreevidhia T N also commended the efforts taken by the family in taking action against the bakery.

“The Commission extends its sincere appreciation to the complainant and their family, recognizing the significant efforts they have made to seek justice for their legitimate rights. Their actions set a commendable example for other consumers facing issues related to deficient service and unfair trade practices perpetrated by unscrupulous traders.”

The family (complainants) who consumed bakery items such as puffs from the bakery of the opposite party experienced symptoms like loose motion, abdominal pain, and vomiting, indicative of food poisoning, had to seek medical treatment. The family stated that they faced mental agony and financial losses due to the consumption of unsafe food and sought compensation for deficiency of service and unfair trade practices.

The Consumer Forum found that the food safety and health authority had ordered a penalty of three thousand rupees to the bakery for violation of safety standards based on the complaint preferred by the family. It also referred to the report of the Assistant Food Safety Officer proving the unhygienic state of the bakery. The observations made in the report showed that the bakery did not produce a license that was issued by the Food Safety And Standards Authority of India during the time of inspection. It also stated that the bakery items were stored in open areas with insects, and rats and were covered using newspapers in an unhygienic manner.

The Consumer Forum found deficiency of service and unfair trade practices on the part of the bakery by taking into consideration of the following:

1. The Commission noted that deficiency of service has occurred since the food sold was not of the standard that was legally or contractually required.
2. It observed that selling goods hazardous to life would amount to an unfair trade practice. Further, the Commission added that if food safety standards were not met leading to food poisoning, it could be construed as unfair trade practice.
3. It observed that Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees every citizen the right to safe and healthy food as part of the right to life.

Furthermore, the Commission appreciated the efforts taken by the family in obtaining reports from the medical authorities and food safety and health authorities using RTI and other means for redressal of their grievances using consumer protection laws.

“Every morning, we are reminded to "Wake up, consumer wake up," but the awakened consumer often finds themselves in the dark. Thankfully, central state governments and our legal systems have established various mechanisms to help guide these awakened consumers out of the darkness. The true awakened consumer is someone who effectively utilizes these systems, and the complainant and their family serve as outstanding examples. The Commission deeply appreciates individuals like them who don't merely point out flaws in existing legal systems but instead discover the limitless potential of the consumer protection laws and the RTI Act. They use this knowledge to obtain essential documents, approach the Commission, and persist until a final verdict is reached in their legal battle.”

With these observations, the Commission ordered the bakery to compensate the family by paying 30,000 rupees as compensation for causing mental and physical hardships. It also ordered payment of 20,000 rupees as cost of proceedings.

Counsel for the complainants: Advocate Tom Joseph

Counsel for the Opposite Party: Advocate P T Girish

Case title: Santhosh Mathew v K N Bhaskaran

Case number: C. C. No. 381/2019

Click Here To Read/Download The Order