This family didn’t check the ice cream label and won Rs 18,000

The commission found that the absence of mandatory details on the packaged products was a violation of the Legal Metrology Act and amounted to an unfair trade practice. However, it also noted that the consumer had not produced medical records to establish that the reported illness was caused by the ice creams.

The district consumer commission, comprising president Vajrala VL Narasimha and members K Vijaya Lakshmi and G Punna Reddy, passed the order on August 31.

According to The Indian Express, the commission directed the manufacturer to pay Rs 15,000 as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and Rs 3,000 towards litigation costs.

Nine ice creams for Rs 260

The dispute arose from a purchase made on December 31, 2023. Chigurupati Trinadh bought six butterscotch and three vanilla cone ice creams for Rs 260.

Trinadh claimed that he and his family consumed the ice creams and subsequently experienced drowsiness, vomiting and loose motions. A local doctor allegedly told them that they were suffering from food poisoning.

He later examined the ice-cream packets and found that they did not carry a manufacturing date or batch number, according to his complaint.

Trinadh approached the manufacturer but alleged that he did not receive a satisfactory response. He subsequently approached the consumer commission, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

He sought Rs 1 lakh in damages for the alleged deficiency and false labelling, besides Rs 25,000 for mental agony.

Manufacturer denies consumer’s allegations

The manufacturer denied the allegations and argued that the retailer had been operating for around 15 years and had approximately 200 distributors and thousands of customers consuming its products. It claimed that there had been no earlier complaints alleging unfair trade practice.

The manufacturer also made allegations concerning Trinadh’s previous interaction with the company, claiming that he had approached it for employment and later threatened the company after his request was rejected. It alleged that he subsequently filed a complaint with the Weights and Measures Department.

The company denied any deficiency in service and sought dismissal of the complaint.

Commission flags missing batch number, manufacturing date

The commission focused on the labelling of the ice-cream packets. It observed that products sold in packaged form are required to carry details such as the maximum retail price, batch number, manufacturing date and expiry date.

The commission found that the ice creams had been sold without a batch number and manufacturing date.

Calling this a “clear violation” of the Legal Metrology Act, the commission held that selling the packaged ice creams without the required information amounted to an unfair trade practice.

However, the commission did not accept the consumer’s claim of illness as conclusively established.

It noted that although Trinadh claimed that he and his family members suffered ill health and were treated by a local doctor, no prescription was produced to substantiate the allegation.

Rs 18,000 payout ordered

The commission partly allowed the complaint and directed the manufacturer to pay Rs 15,000 as compensation for deficiency in service and mental agony and Rs 3,000 towards litigation costs.

Therefore, the total amount ordered stands at Rs 18,000.

Takeaway

This case talks about mandatory labelling on packaged food products is not merely a formality. Batch numbers and manufacturing dates provide consumers with basic information about a product and can be important when questions arise over its quality or safety.

At the same time, the order shows the importance of preserving medical evidence when consumers allege that a packaged food product caused illness. In this case, the commission found a labelling violation but noted the absence of medical documentation supporting the illness claim.