NEW DELHI: A consumer commission in Himachal Pradesh has directed a retailer to refund the price of a packet of instant noodles and pay compensation to a man whose minor daughter fell ill after eating the expired product, in its order on July 6.what was the dispute aboutThe complainant, Jugal Kishore, bought a packet of Spicy Korean instant noodles from a retail store in Bhawarna on February 26, 2026. His minor daughter ate a portion of the noodles after he brought them home after which she soon began vomiting and got unwell, according to the court order.Then while checking the packaging, Kishore found that the noodles had expired months earlier. He approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kangra at Dharamshala, seeking a refund, compensation and litigation costs, arguing that the store had put his family’s health at risk by selling an expired item.However, the retailer argued that the complainant had not submitted any medical or laboratory evidence linking the noodles to his daughter’s illness, that the packet was sealed and compliant with FSSAI norms with the expiry date printed on it, that customers were responsible for checking dates before buying, and that the manufacturer — not the retailer — should have been made a party to the case since the store had also displayed notices asking shoppers to check expiry dates.What the commission saidThe bench comprising president Hemanshu Mishra and members Arti Sood and Narayan Thakur observed that the noodles carried a printed expiry date of 28.11.2025 which means that the product had already expired three months prior to the date of sale.“The Opposite Party’s defence relying on the doctrine of caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) holds absolutely no merit under modern Indian law. The modern legal framework operates strictly on the principle of caveat venditor (let the seller beware), especially concerning human consumption and public health,” the commission said.It added that a consumer cannot be expected to turn over every packet or hunt for a date printed at the bottom of the package while picking up daily groceries from open shelves.“The opposite party’s contention that the manufacturer should be joined as a necessary party is legally flawed. The product itself did not have an inherent manufacturing defect or premature spoilage before its expiry date. The manufacturer clearly printed the valid shelf-life on the wrapper, complying with FSSAI regulations. The wrong occurred entirely at the retail stage because the Opposite Party failed to clear its expired inventory,” the commission observed.On the retailer’s claim that the manufacturer should have been made a party to the case, the commission held that the fault lay entirely with the store for not clearing expired stock in time, and that this made the retailer directly and solely liable. It also said that putting up notices asking customers to check expiry dates did not let the retailer off the hook.On the absence of medical evidence, the commission noted that this was a summary consumer proceeding, not a criminal trial, and that it was very unlikely a father would falsely claim his young daughter had fallen ill just to claim a small amount of compensation. It held that selling an expired food item directly violated the consumer’s right to safety under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.The commission ordered the retail store to refund the full price of the noodles, pay Rs 15,000 as compensation for the mental agony caused to the family, and pay a further Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs — all within 30 days of the order.
