Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

SRI DEBASIS SARKAR v. THE MANAGER, SMART BAZAR, RELIANCE RETAIL LTD.,

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sep 29, 2026

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

NADIA

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. DC/320/CC/13/2024

SRI DEBASIS SARKAR

PRESENT ADDRESS - AGE- ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O- PADMALOCHAN SARKAR, VILL- SAHAPARA, DR. JATIN ROY LANE, P.O.- BETHUADAHARI, P.S.-NAKASHIPARA, DIST- NADIA, PIN-

741126, WEST BENGALNADIA,WEST BENGAL.

.......Complainant(s)

Versus

THE MANAGER, SMART BAZAR, RELIANCE RETAIL LTD.,

PRESENT ADDRESS - P.O.- KRISHNAGAR, P.S.- KOTWALI, WARD NO.- 17, DIST- NADIA, PIN- 741101NADIA,WEST BENGAL.

MR. TARUN CHATTERJEE,

PRESENT ADDRESS - ASSISTANT STORE MANAGER, SMART BAZAR, P.O.- KRISHNAGAR, P.S.- KOTWALI, WARD NO.- 17, DIST- NADIA, PIN- 741101NADIA,WEST BENGAL.

.......Opposite Party(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MS. ASIMA PAL , PRESIDENT HON'BLE MRS. BALAKA CHATTERJEE , MEMBER HON'BLE MR. SHITANGSHU KUMAR SAHA , MEMBER FOR THE COMPLAINANT: SRI DEBASIS SARKAR, PRODIP BANERJEE (Advocate)

FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTY: THE MANAGER, SMART BAZAR, RELIANCE RETAIL LTD.,MR.

TARUN CHATTERJEE,

DATED: 29/09/2026

ORDER

Date of filing:- 19.02.2024 Date of delivery of judgment:- 29.09.2026

Asima Pal, President

This is a case under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act. The complainant has filed this case on the ground of deficiency in service with allegation that on 27.01.2023 the complainant purchased products /

1

from Smart Bazar , Krishnagar, amounting of Rs.320/-including one unit of Parle Krackgack butter Masala. After reaching home the complainant checked those products and found one biscuits packet Parlay Crackgack Butter Masala bears expiry date 25.12.22(use by 25.12.2022). The complainant lodged verbal complaint over-phone being complaint No.42958261 but the complainant did not get any relief and for which the complainant lodged complainant on 06.02.2023 before the District Consumer Affairs, Nadia. The Consumer Affairs orally suggested to compromise the matter but the OP did not appear. After that the complainant lodged complaint before S.P, Krishnagar, Nadia and CMOH, Nadia on 17.02.2023 for proper redress. When he did not get any reply he compelled to take shelter under RTI Act 2005. As per report of S.PI.O. KPD and Deputy Superintendent of Police (HS) the Manager of Smart Bazar stated that no expiry product sold in their shop. According to the complainant the Opposite parties adopted unfair trade practice and for which the complainant suffered a lot . Hence this case. The OP No.1 and 2 contested this case by filing W/V where they denied all material allegations mentioned against them. According to opposite parties they did not store any expiry product in their outlet. So, selling of such products does not arise. The Opposite parties already informed it to the Assistant Director , Consumer Affairs and FBP, Nadia. According to the opposite parties the complainant is not consumer and have prayed for dismissal of this case.

Points for Determination

1. Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for.

DECESION WITH REASON

Both parties in support of their contention have produced their respective evidences. It is the grievance of the complainant that the OP No.1 sold out expired product to the complainant on 27.01.2023. In support of it he has produced Tax in voice of Smart Bazar. After going through this documents it appears that on 27.01.2023 the complainant purchased articles amounting of Rs.320/- including one biscuits packed Parlay Crack Jack Butter masala of 120gm, the of Rs.28.50. From the evidence of the complainant it appears that the

Smart Bazar sold out that expiry product. To substantiate it the complainant referred annexure -J which is photocopy of packaging of Crack Jack Biscuits showing net weight of 120gms, M.R.P. of Rs. 30.00. In it there is reflection of PKD: 28.06.2022 BN:KP C use by 25.12.2022. It bears also No. 8901719117152 and said No. is mentioned in Tax in Voice dated 27.01.2023.

2

Both the documents indicate that the complainant purchased said packed of Biscuits the expiry date of which is mentioned by using the words use by 25.12.2022. Apparently it is clear that said product was sold after its expiry period. The documents on record show that the complainant to get redress sent letters to different Authorities. From annexure-B it appears that the Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs and FBP, Nadia issued letter to the Manager, Smart Bazar Reliance Ltd. Krishnagar with direction to appear before mediation but on the date fixed the opposite party did not appear. From the annexure-C also it appears that said Consumer Affairs Department on 06.03.2023 again by issuing letter requested them to appear for mediation but the opposite party NO.1 remained absent. It is found that the OP NO.1 by giving letter to Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs, FBP, Nadia denied all allegations made by the complainant. From the annexure J It is clear that the biscuits were manufactured and packaged 0n June 28, 2022.The word BN:KP C is the batch number and the word Use by 25.12.22 is the expiration date. This commission finds that the number mentioned in invoice dt 27.01.23 is tallied with the number reflected in packed of said product. It is clear that the OP No.1 sold out product after date of expiry. Now the question comes whether it comes within the definition of deficiency in service. It is the view of the commission that selling of any product after its expiry date is deficiency in service and unfair Trade practice. Under the Food Safety and Standard Act and the Consumer Protection Act selling goods past their expiration date is strictly prohibited. This commission thinks that Traders have a duty to inspect inventory and clear expired stock. Here it is found that the price o0f the product is very nominal but it is duty of the opposite parties to sell fresh product. It is not the case of the complainant that he suffered physical illness but selling expired goods caused financial loss and mental agony. It is well known that Smart Bazar is both Hypermarket and band retailer. Every day number of customers visit this shop for purchasing various goods. The selling of expiry goods affect not only complainant but also public at large. The retailers cannot shift the liability on to the customer to check expiry date before purchase. So, considering all aspects this commission finds that the complainant is able to prove his case and is entitled to get relief as prayed for. In view of it the case stands.

Hence,

It is

ORDERED

This case be and the same is allowed on contest against the opposite parties.

The complainant is entitled to get refund value of the product amounting of Rs. 28.50/- from the opposite parties. The complainant is also entitled to get /

3

compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for mental pain and agony. He is also entitled to get litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- from the opposite parties. Both the opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the aforesaid amounts to the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order.

In default the complainant shall have liberty to execute the same through process of law.

Let the copy of this final order be given to the parties at free of cost.

Dictated and Corrected by Asima Pal, President

..................

ASIMA PAL

PRESIDENT

..................

BALAKA CHATTERJEE

MEMBER

..................

SHITANGSHU KUMAR SAHA

MEMBER

4