The Economic Times daily newspaper is available online now.

    Kerala restaurant didn’t serve gravy with Parotta and beef fry, Kerala consumer court says that’s perfectly legal

    Synopsis

    A Kerala journalist filed a complaint against a restaurant. He was upset for not getting gravy with his porotta and beef fry. The consumer court dismissed his complaint. The court stated the restaurant did not mislead the customer. The menu did not mention gravy. The court found no violation of consumer protection laws.

    Kerala restaurant didn’t serve gravy with Parotta and beef fry Kerala consumer court says that’s perfectly legaliStock
    A consumer court in Kerala has dismissed a complaint filed by a journalist who was upset that a restaurant did not serve gravy with his porotta and beef fry.

    The journalist, who works as a freelancer, had gone to a restaurant in Kolenchery with a friend last year. They ordered beef fry and porotta and asked the waiter for some gravy to go with the food. However, the waiter told them that the restaurant does not serve gravy with those items. The manager later confirmed this as the restaurant's policy.

    Unhappy with the response, the journalist filed a complaint at the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. He said the food was dry and hard to eat without gravy, which caused him discomfort and emotional distress. He demanded ₹1,00,000 as compensation for mental agony, ₹10,000 for legal expenses, and also wanted legal action against the restaurant under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

    But the consumer court rejected the complaint. It said there was no evidence that the restaurant misled the customer or promised to serve gravy. The menu and the bill did not mention gravy being included. The court also said that just because the restaurant chooses not to serve gravy does not mean it is breaking any law or providing poor service.

    The journalist had argued that not providing gravy was a way to force customers to buy extra curry, calling it a "restrictive trade practice." But the court disagreed and said there was no merit in that claim.

    In short, the court ruled that the restaurant did nothing wrong by not serving gravy, and the complaint was not valid under the Consumer Protection Act.


    (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)

    (Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.)

    Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online.

    ...more
    The Economic Times

    Stories you might be interested in