NEW DELHI: The Ludhiana district consumer commission has directed Vishal Mega Mart to refund Rs 182 to a customer after finding that an expired food product was sold to him. The commission also ordered the retailer to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation and litigation costs and restrained it from selling or displaying expired products. The order was passed on September 8, 2026.Why did the customer complain against Vishal Mega Mart?According to the commission order, Rajwinder Singh visited the retailer’s Ludhiana store on December 1, 2025, and bought Kelloggs Multigrain Chocos Fills for Rs 182 along with other items. He paid Rs 228 through UPI. After reaching home, he noticed that the product carried a date of November 1, 2025. He alleged that the retailer had sold him an expired product and that it was unsafe for human consumption.The customer alleged that he informed the store but received no response. He then sent a legal notice on January 10, 2026, which also went unanswered. He approached the consumer commission seeking a refund of Rs 182, Rs 2 lakh as compensation and Rs 3,500 towards litigation expenses.The retailer denied any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice. It argued that merely producing a bill did not establish that the expired product shown by the customer was the same product purchased under that bill. It said the product could have been purchased earlier or from another store.The retailer also claimed that the complaint was part of a series of similarly structured cases and alleged that the customer and his associates were deliberately linking expired products with genuine bills to seek compensation. The retailer asked the commission to dismiss the complaint.What did the consumer commission find?The bench comprising President Sanjeev Batra along with member Monika Bhagat noted that the retailer had admitted issuing the invoice but had taken a tentative position about the identity of the product. It said the retailer could have produced details such as the batch number, manufacturing date and expiry date of the product sold under the invoice but did not do so.The commission also referred to the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. It noted that the law treats the sale of food after its expiry date as a matter for which the seller can be held liable.“Further Section 2(9) (i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 reads as under:- ‘(9) “consumer rights” includes,– (i) the right to be protected against the marketing of goods, products or services which are hazardous to life and property’,” the commission noted.It held that the customer’s right to safety had been affected and said sellers and manufacturers have a legal obligation to ensure that products are safe and fit for their intended purpose.The commission further rejected the retailer’s argument that the product shown in the photographs might have come from another transaction. It observed that the retailer claimed to have inventory management and compliance systems but had not produced evidence that could have clarified the issue.“The assertion of the OPs though looks fanciful, but it is devoid of any merits or logic. Since the OPs have claimed that the maintenance of robust and well-established inventory management and compliance systems including automated billing and systematic stock retention mechanisms, the OPs could have very detect such alleged previous transaction by a click of the mouse, but no such evidence was brought before this Commission,” it further added.The commission held that the retailer was guilty of deficient service and unfair trade practice for selling the expired product. It directed Vishal Mega Mart to refund Rs 182 within 30 days of receiving the order. If the refund is not made within that period, the retailer will have to pay Rs 200 per day from the date of the order until payment, subject to a maximum of Rs 10,000.The commission also ordered the retailer to pay Rs 10,000 as composite compensation and costs. It directed the opposite parties to discontinue the unfair trade practice and restrained them from selling, displaying or exhibiting expired products for sale.“Therefore, the acts and omissions of the OPs have not only resulted in causing of monetary loss to the complainant, but the complainant has also suffered mental agony and shock. As such, the OPs are guilty of rendering deficient service and also adopted the unfair trade practice while selling the expiry product to the complainant,” the bench concluded.
