Rotten Cake, Bangalore District Commission Orders Vinayaka Cake Shop To Refund Amount, Pay Compensation & Legal Costs

Recently, the Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission bench comprising of B. Narayanappa (President), Jyothi N (Member) and Sharavathi S.M (Member) held a cake shop liable for selling a black forest cake in a rotten state and unsuitable for consumption to the complainant. The bench noted that the poor quality of the cake caused vomiting and diarrhoea among the guests invited by the Complainant on her son’s birthday. Brief Facts of the Case: On May 1, 2022, Pooja Shankar (“Complainant”), a resident of Thyagarajanagar in Bangalore, placed an order for a 3.2kg black forest cake from Vinayaka Cake Shop, located on DVG Road, Basavanagudi, South Bengaluru. She paid an initial advance of Rs 1,000 and settled the remaining balance of Rs 2,590 on the day of her younger son's birthday celebration, April 30, 2022. However, upon receiving the cake, the Complainant discovered that it was in a rotten state and unsuitable for consumption. The alleged poor quality of the cake not only disrupted the birthday party but also led to complaints of vomiting and diarrhoea among the birthday boy and the other guests. Aggrieved, she filed a consumer complaint in the Bangalore I Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“District Commission”). The Complainant argued that she had placed an order for a 3.2kg black forest cake with Vinayaka Cake Shop for her son's birthday celebration. She contended that the cake delivered by the bakery was rotten and of poor quality. The Complainant claimed that the substandard cake caused her son and other guests to suffer from vomiting and diarrhoea, leading to significant discomfort and embarrassment during the celebration. She sought a refund for the spoiled cake and asserted that she had a legitimate grievance against the bakery's deficient service and product quality. Vinayaka Cake Shop contended that they were not cake manufacturers but a franchisee of the renowned brand, Sweet Chariot. They claimed to have been engaged in buying and selling cakes and pastries from Sweet Chariot for over two decades, maintaining high-quality standards and an excellent track record. The bakery denied the allegations made by the Complainant, asserting that her claims of poor service and product quality were baseless and suggested that she had ulterior motives. Observations by the Commission: After careful consideration, the District Commission acknowledged the seriousness of the Complainant’s case, emphasizing that individuals typically would not resort to legal action over a cake dispute unless the matter held substantial merit. The Complainant provided photographs of the cake, email correspondence with the bakery, and other evidence to substantiate her claims. In contrast, Vinayaka Cake Shop failed to furnish any substantiating evidence, such as cake quality testing results or other relevant documentation. Considering the lack of evidence presented by the bakery and the adverse impact on the Complainant’s son's birthday celebration, the District Commission ruled in favour of the complainant. The commission ordered Vinayaka Cake Shop to compensate the Complainant with Rs 3,000 for deficiency in service and mental harassment caused by the spoiled cake. Additionally, the bakery was directed to cover the Complainant’s court expenses amounting to Rs 3,000. Vinayaka Cake Shop was also instructed to provide a refund of Rs 3,590 for the spoiled cake. All monetary obligations were to be fulfilled within two months from the date of the commission’s order. Case: Pooja Shankar vs Vinayaka Cake Shop Case No.: CC/297/2022 Advocate for the Complainant: Party in person Advocate for the Opposite Party(s): CM Mahadeshwara

Rotten Cake, Bangalore District Commission Orders Vinayaka Cake Shop To Refund Amount, Pay Compensation & Legal Costs

Smita Singh

Tags