A consumer disputes redressal commission in Punjab has ordered a retail outlet to pay Rs 10,000 in compensation and refund the purchase price of a cold drink sold one day past its shelf life.
In an order pronounced on September 8, a bench comprising President Sanjeev Batra and member Monika Bhagat ruled that the store engaged in unfair trade practices and delivered deficient service. The panel found that the transaction caused the buyer financial loss as well as mental distress, adding that the outlet knowingly made an unsafe item available for public consumption in breach of product safety norms.
Failure To Produce Stock Records
The commission dismissed the merchant’s defence after observing that the business failed to produce internal sales records to substantiate its claims. Although the retail firm maintained that it utilized sophisticated, automated inventory controls and stock-retention systems, it did not submit batch codes, manufacturing details, or expiry information linked to the disputed transaction. The bench observed that the establishment withheld crucial evidence readily available in its records.
Purchase Details And Legal Action
The dispute arose from a transaction on July 30, 2025, when the complainant purchased multiple items totalling Rs 116.05, including a bottle of a cold drink priced at Rs 69.30. After returning home, the consumer noticed the beverage carried a “best before” date of July 29, 2025.
Following an unsuccessful visit to the outlet and an unanswered legal notice, the customer approached the consumer forum. The plea sought a full refund of the product, Rs 2 lakh in damages, and Rs 3,500 to cover legal costs.
Retailer Alleged Coordinated Litigation
Contesting the claim, the retailer argued that producing a cash receipt did not confirm that the photographed expired bottle originated from that specific purchase. The company asserted that the merchandise could have been bought earlier or procured from a different vendor. It also contended that the filing was part of an orchestrated pattern of similar complaints designed to secure inflated compensation by matching genuine receipts with outdated products.
The commission rejected the retailer’s contentions and instructed the firm to refund the Rs 69 purchase cost while paying Rs 10,000 to cover compensation and legal expenses.
