Consumer Court Rejects Religious Sentiment Claim Against Non-Veg Food Delivery

If a person is strictly vegetarian and non-vegetarian food hurts their religious sentiments, then why should they order food from a restaurant that offers both veg and non-veg options? This was the question posed by a consumer court in Mumbai while rejecting a claim by two individuals who said their religious sentiments were hurt after the popular eatery 'Wow Momo' delivered chicken momos instead of the vegetarian momos they ordered.

A coram of President Pradeep Kadu and Member Gauri Kapse of the Mumbai Suburban Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission noted that the applicants claimed they ordered 'Veg Steam Darjeeling Momo' along with a Pepsi, but received chicken momos, leading to emotional distress, mental trauma, and hurt religious sentiments. The applicants demanded Rs 6 lakhs as compensation.

However, the coram observed that the applicants failed to substantiate their claims of performing any Pooja (rituals) while they ordered the food and then received non-veg food. They did not provide names of any Pandit or Poojari who performed the Pooja, nor did they disclose the nature, name, date, and place of the religious ceremonies.

The court stated, 'If the Complainants were strictly vegetarian and the non-veg food hurts their religious sentiments, then, why they opted to order the food items from the restaurant which was delivering both non-veg and vegetarian food instead of ordering the food from a restaurant which was exclusively vegetarian, and served only and only vegetarian food.'

Furthermore, the coram noted that the applicants failed to produce any evidence that they had only ordered veg momos and not chicken ones. The invoice of their order indicated that they ordered chicken momos. The applicants had alleged that they twice instructed one of the representatives of Wow Momo to ensure that they send only veg momos, but this contention could not be substantiated.

The Veg and Non-veg momos prices are the same. The Complainants produced 2-3 photos of the dish, but the court could not determine if they were veg or non-veg momos. No inference could be drawn in view of the fact that the Complainants failed to prove that on the given date, a non-veg order had been delivered to them instead of a veg order.

In its six-page order, authored by Member Kapse, the coram stated, 'If non-veg order had been delivered to the Complainants instead of veg order, then, it ought to have contained only and only non-veg pieces therein. A prudent person would be able to distinguish between veg and non-veg food before consuming it seems reasonable.'

The applicants produced a photo of the offer board which didn't clearly indicate whether the Steam Darjeeling Momo (1 plate) + Pepsi was veg or non-veg. However, the board did mention 'veg/non-veg' at the bottom, suggesting that the restaurant provided some indication of the food type. This could imply that the Complainants should have been aware of the possibility of both veg and non-veg options being available.

With these observations, the coram held that the applicants failed to point out any negligence in the service of Wow Momo and therefore dismissed the complaint.