22-05-2025
Free serving of gravy with parotta is no longer guaranteed
If you are someone who is used to free servings of gravy with the crisply served 'parotta' and beef fry, do not be surprised if the gravy goes missing next time when you order parotta.
The Ernakulam District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has decreed that not providing gravy along with parotta and beef cannot be considered as a deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act. The order was issued on a petition filed by Shibu S. Vayalakath of Choondi against Persian Table Restaurant at Kolencherry.
According to the complainant, the restaurant did not serve gravy when he ordered parotta and beef fry while dining out with a friend last year. The restaurant manager and the owner reportedly told him that it was against their policy to serve gravy. The complainant filed a complaint with the Kunnathunadu taluk supply officer who, based on an inspection, confirmed that the establishment did not provide gravy with dry food items.
The complainant then approached the Commission with a petition seeking compensation of ₹1 lakh for mental agony, ₹10,000 towards legal costs, and legal action against the restaurant under the Consumer Protection Act. The Commission observed that the complainant had not raised any grievance regarding the quality, quantity, or safety of the food items that were ordered, consumed, and paid for, but only about the non-availability of gravy, which was neither promised nor charged for.
'Under Section 2(11) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, 'deficiency' means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming, or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance of services which is required to be maintained under law or contract. In the instant case, there was no contractual obligation, express or implied, on the part of the opposite party to provide gravy,' the Commission said.
Therefore, not providing gravy with parotta and beef cannot be considered a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, and hence no enforceable consumer relationship arises in this respect.
'It is a settled position of law that unless there is a direct nexus between the service availed and the consideration paid by the complainant, a complaint would not be maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act as the existence of a transactional relationship is a pre-requisite to invoke the jurisdiction of the Consumer Commission,' the order said.
