| Address: 40/1A, Srinivasa Arcade, Mahadevpura, Bangalore-560048 |
| Website: www.kantis.com |
Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore
Complaint No.: 01 of 2026
Complainant: Partha Pratim Nandy, senior citizen, retired person, resident of Flat B-306, Purva Seasons, Kaggadasapura Main Road, CV Raman Nagar, Bangalore-560093 Opposite Party:Kanti's (marketed by Sharma Enterprise, Mahadevpura, Bangalore-560048, mob-[protected]; www.kantis.in; fssai Lic No: [protected]; manufactured by: Australian Foods India Pvt Ltd, Ambattur Industrial Estate, Chennai-600058, www.cookiemanindia.com; fssai Lic No: [protected]); Address: 40/1A, Srinivasa Arcade, Mahadevpura, Bangalore-560048
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. The Complainant is a "consumer" within Section 2(7) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, having purchased the product below from the Opposite Party for consideration vide Bill No. 13640 dated 31 May 2026.
2. Particulars of the product: Pista Biskut, net quantity declared 200gm, MRP ₹272, batch MS 0270, mfg 16 May 2026, expiry 15 Sept 2026.
3. Cause of action / unfair and deceptive conduct (keep what applies): The Opposite Party sold short net quantities using non-edible filler. This caused the Complainant to be misled into purchasing on a false impression of the product's quantity.
4. The above amounts to:
o an "unfair trade practice" under Section 2(47) (false representation as to standard/quality/quantity/grade; selling above the printed price; misleading the public);
o a "defect" under Section 2(10) and/or "deficiency" under Section 2(11);
o a "misleading" representation falling within Section 2(28);
o and supports a product-liability claim under Chapter VI (Sections 82–87), the product carrying a deficient/false label.
5. Statutory breaches relied on: sale of misbranded food under the FSS Act, 2006 (Sections 3(1)(zf), 26, 52, 53) read with the FSS (Labelling and Display) Regulations, 2020, and breach of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 / Packaged Commodities Rules, 2011 (mandatory declarations; bar on altering MRP/date declarations; no sale above MRP).
6. Reliefs prayed for (under Section 39):
1. Refund of ₹240 with interest;
2. Compensation of ₹300000 for the deceptive practice and mental agony;
3. A direction to the Opposite Party to cease the unfair trade practice and to withdraw/recall the mislabelled stock;
4. Punitive damages and costs of the proceeding;
5. A direction to forward the matter to the Food Safety Authority for licensing action; and
6. Any other relief the Commission deems fit.
VERIFICATION: I, Partha Pratim Nandy, verify that the contents of paragraphs 1 to 6 are true to my knowledge. Verified at Bangalore on 1st June 2026.
Partha Pratim Nandy
Was this information helpful?
Post your Comment