Why should a vegetarian order from non-veg serving eatery if it hurts sentiments? Consumer panel says

The Hindu

7 hours ago

A consumer redressal commission in Mumbai has said if meat-based food hurts a "strictly vegetarian" person's religious sentiments, why should the individual opt to order from a restaurant serving both veg and non-veg items.
It seems reasonable that "a prudent person would be able to distinguish between veg and non-veg food before consuming," the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai Suburban (Additional) said in an order passed last month.
The commission dismissed a complaint by two persons against an eatery for allegedly wrongly serving them non-vegetarian food.
"If the complainants were strictly vegetarian and non-veg food hurts their religious sentiments, then why did they opt to order the food items from the restaurant which was delivering both non-veg and vegetarian food, instead of ordering the food from the restaurant which was exclusively vegetarian and served only and only vegetarian food," it said.
As per the complainants, they had ordered a steamed 'Darjeeling momo combo' with a soft drink from a Momo outlet at Sion in Mumbai on December 19, 2020.
Also read: Why did the Brahmins become vegetarian? B.R. Ambedkar asks in this excerpt from 'Beef, Brahmins and Broken Men'
They claimed to have specifically emphasised their vegetarian preference twice. However, they received steamed "chicken Darjeeling momos", the complainants said.
They further alleged that the eatery staff ignored their instructions and that the display board at the outlet did not clearly indicate vegetarian or non-vegetarian options for the combo.
The complainants claimed they suffered mental trauma, emotional distress and their religious feelings were hurt due to the negligence of the company.
They sought ₹6 lakh in compensation for the distress caused.
The company, on the other hand, contended the complainants themselves ordered non-vegetarian items, as indicated by the invoice.
It alleged that the complainants physically abused their employee and created a nuisance, leading them to refund the order and provide the products free of cost. The company submitted that the complainants were not "consumers" under the Consumer Protection Act due to the refund.
Despite the alleged behaviour, the company said it offered a gift voucher worth ₹1,200 as a goodwill gesture, but the complainants demanded ₹3 lakh each.
The complaint was filed with malafide intention to harass the company, it claimed. The commission noted that the invoice indicated the complainants ordered non-veg momos.
"A prudent person would be able to distinguish between veg and non-veg food before consuming it seems reasonable," the commission noted.
The commission pointed out that while the offer board's photo did not clearly state if the steamed Darjeeling Momo combo was veg or non-veg, it did mention "veg/non-veg" at the bottom, implying the availability of both the options. Furthermore, the complainants failed to provide evidence or details regarding any religious ceremonies they claimed were affected, the commission said.
The complainants have not been able to establish any deficiency in service on the part of the company, it added.