NEW DELHI: A Kerala district consumer commission, in an order dated July 14, directed a bakery to pay compensation after it sold four expired Diet Coke tins to a customer. The commission held that selling expired food products amounts to deficiency in service and ruled that the liability in such cases rests with the seller, not Coca-Cola India, which was not involved in the sale of the product.Why did the customer approach the commission?According to the commission’s order, the complainant purchased four Diet Coke tins from Dhanusri Bengaluru Bakery in Mulugu on August 30, 2025, for Rs 160. When he opened one of the tins, he found that it had expired on August 9, 2025, and was therefore unfit for consumption.The complainant alleged that when he confronted the bakery owner about selling an expired product, the owner tried to offer him Rs 2,000 to keep the matter quiet instead of giving a proper explanation. He refused the offer, retained the remaining three tins, lodged a police complaint and later sent a legal notice before approaching the consumer commission.However, Coca-Cola India argued that it neither manufactured nor sold the beverage in question. It contended that the products were manufactured and distributed by independent authorised bottlers and that, under the Food Safety and Standards Act, liability for selling expired food products rests with the seller.Why did the commission rule against the bakery?The bench comprising President G. Nagaraju and member B. Raji Reddy found that the purchase of the Diet Coke tins from the bakery was undisputed and that the complainant had also lodged a police complaint after discovering that the product had expired. It noted that the bakery owner and its employee failed to appear before the commission or contest the allegations despite being given several opportunities.“As the Opposite Parties 1 and 2 who are actual sellers failed to appear and contest the case and the evidence adduced by the complainant was not rebutted, therefore deficiency of service can be attributed against Opposite Parties 1 and 2 only,” the bench said.The commission also accepted Coca-Cola India’s contention that it was not the seller of the product and could not be held responsible merely because its trademark appeared on the beverage. Relying on earlier consumer law decisions, it held that liability for selling an expired product rested with the retailer.“Where the manufacturer is not the seller… nor distributor cannot be fastened liability against it. Therefore, the deficiency of service cannot be attributed against Opposite Party No.3 and 4,” the bench added.The commission observed that the bakery was duty-bound to refund the price of the expired product and compensate the consumer for the mental agony caused by selling a food item that was unfit for consumption.“The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are duty bound to return the value of expiry product of 4 tins of diet coke of Rs.160/- and Rs.10,000/- towards Mental Agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs,” it further observed.Holding the bakery owner and its employee guilty of deficiency in service, the commission directed them to jointly refund Rs 160, pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs. It also directed them to deposit Rs 10,000 with the Consumer Welfare Fund maintained by the Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The complaint against Coca-Cola India was dismissed.
