A pizza that arrived three inches smaller than advertised has landed a food delivery platform and a restaurant in legal trouble, with a consumer commission in Uttarakhand ordering them to jointly pay Rs 10,520 to the customer.
A pizza that arrived three inches smaller than advertised has landed a food delivery platform and a restaurant in legal trouble, with a consumer commission in Uttarakhand ordering them to jointly pay Rs 10,520 to the customer. According to an Indian Express report, the consumer had ordered a 10-inch pizza priced at Rs 505 through an online food delivery app. However, what reached his doorstep measured just seven inches.
The Uttarakhand consumer commission, headed by President Gagan Kumar Gupta, along with members Dr Amresh Rawat and Ranjana Goyal, ruled that delivering a pizza significantly smaller than the one ordered amounted to deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice.
The commission directed the platform and restaurant to jointly and severally compensate the customer within 45 days. The order states, “The opposite parties are ordered to jointly and severally pay the complainant, within 45 days from the date of this order, a total sum of Rs 10,520, which includes Rs 505 towards the price of the pizza in question plus Rs 15 delivery charges, Rs 5,000 as compensation for mental and physical harassment, and Rs 5,000 as litigation expenses.”
Customer Challenged Seven-Inch Pizza Delivery
The customer had placed an order for a 10-inch pizza worth Rs 505 but received a seven-inch pizza instead. After noticing the discrepancy, he immediately contacted the food delivery platform through its support chat and sought a refund.
However, his request was reportedly rejected despite the pizza failing to match the size advertised at the time of purchase.
With the issue unresolved, the consumer escalated the matter to the National Consumer Helpline (NCH) and the CPGRAMS portal. He also issued a formal legal notice before eventually approaching the consumer forum.
Food Delivery Platform Claims It Was Only An Intermediary
During the proceedings, the food delivery platform argued that it merely served as an intermediary connecting restaurants with customers. It maintained that it was neither the manufacturer nor the preparer, packager or seller of the food ordered through its platform.
The commission, however, rejected the defence and held the opposite parties responsible for the service deficiency, noting that the pizza delivered did not correspond with the product ordered by the consumer.
The commission ordered payment of Rs 520 towards the pizza’s Rs 505 price and Rs 15 delivery charge. An additional Rs 5,000 was awarded for mental and physical harassment, while another Rs 5,000 was imposed towards litigation expenses.