Scribd
Upload
98 views2 pages

Consumer Complaint Lulu

Mr. I. Prabhu filed a consumer complaint against Lulu Hypermarket for misleading labeling on a purchased Dream Cake, which displayed conflicting manufacturing and expiry dates. The complaint alleges violations of the Consumer Protection Act, Food Safety and Standards Act, and Legal Metrology Act, seeking a refund, compensation for mental distress, and corrective measures. The Opposite Parties denied liability, prompting the complainant to seek legal redress.

Uploaded by

Ashwath Rajaram
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
98 views2 pages

Consumer Complaint Lulu

Mr. I. Prabhu filed a consumer complaint against Lulu Hypermarket for misleading labeling on a purchased Dream Cake, which displayed conflicting manufacturing and expiry dates. The complaint alleges violations of the Consumer Protection Act, Food Safety and Standards Act, and Legal Metrology Act, seeking a refund, compensation for mental distress, and corrective measures. The Opposite Parties denied liability, prompting the complainant to seek legal redress.

Uploaded by

Ashwath Rajaram
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

COIMBATORE

Consumer Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

COMPLAINANT:
Mr. I. Prabhu (Age 34)
S/O. Iruthayaraja
Residing at No-20, Sriram Colony,
Ramalinga Jothi Nagar, Ramanathapuram,
Coimbatore - 641045.

OPPOSITE PARTIES:
1. The Managing Director
Lulu Hypermarket Private Limited
Office Room No. 3, 34/1000, N.H. 47,
Edappally, Kochi, Ernakulam, Kerala - 682024.

2. The Branch Manager


Lulu Hypermarket Coimbatore
627-B1-A, The Lakshmi Mills, Avinashi Road,
Lakshmi Mills, Coimbatore - 641037.

COMPLAINT

1. The complainant purchased a 5-layer Dream Cake (275g) from the Opposite Parties on
13/01/2025 under Invoice No - 205701. The product label displayed price, manufacturing date, and
expiry date.

2. Upon opening the package, the complainant found two stickers layered on top of each other with
conflicting details:

- **Top Layer:** Price Rs.299, Manufacturing Date 13/01/2025, Expiry Date 17/01/2025.
- **Bottom Layer:** Price Rs.249, Manufacturing Date 12/01/2025, Expiry Date 16/01/2025.

3. This deceptive labeling misrepresented crucial details, violating consumer rights and food safety
laws. It misled the complainant into purchasing a potentially expired product at an inflated price.
4. The complainant issued a legal notice dated 18/01/2025. The Opposite Parties responded on
31/01/2025, denying liability and failing to provide satisfactory redressal.

5. This conduct constitutes **unfair trade practices** under Section 2(47) of the Consumer
Protection Act, 2019, violation of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and breach of the Legal
Metrology Act, 2009.

LEGAL VIOLATIONS

a) **Consumer Protection Act, 2019:**


- Section 2(47): Engaging in unfair trade practices.
- Section 36: Misleading advertisements, liable for fine up to Rs. 10 lakhs.

b) **Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006:**


- Section 24: Prohibits false advertisements.
- Section 26(2)(ii): Selling misbranded or unsafe food.

c) **Legal Metrology Act, 2009:**


- Section 10: Mandates accurate labeling of packaged goods.

d) **Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) Act, 2016:**


- Section 17: Ensures accurate labeling for public safety.
- Section 29: Punishable for violations.

RELIEF SOUGHT

The complainant prays for the following reliefs:

1. A written explanation from the Opposite Parties regarding the fraudulent labeling.
2. Refund of Rs. 299 paid for the defective product.
3. Compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental agony, inconvenience, and breach of trust.
4. A direction to the Opposite Parties to implement corrective measures to prevent recurrence.
5. Any further relief deemed just and necessary in the interest of justice.

Place: Coimbatore

Date: __/02/2025

(Signature of the Complainant)

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy