A District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Jaipur has directed PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. to pay ₹8,000 in compensation and litigation expenses after a ₹5 packet of Lay’s potato chips was found to contain just 4 grams of chips against the declared net weight of 15 grams. The commission also ordered the company to refund the packet’s purchase price with interest, holding the manufacturer responsible for the substantial shortfall in the sealed product.
The ruling, reported on October 23, 2026, concerns a complaint filed by Jaipur resident Chandrabhan Jalan over a purchase made in November 2020. The District Consumer Commission, Jaipur-II, found that the evidence presented supported the complaint and treated the underweight product as a deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice. The decision highlights the responsibility of packaged-goods manufacturers to ensure that products contain the quantities declared on their labels.
Key Takeaways
- Product shortfall: A ₹5 Lay’s packet declared to contain 15 grams of chips reportedly contained only 4 grams.
- Compensation: PepsiCo was ordered to pay ₹5,000 for mental distress and inconvenience, plus ₹3,000 in litigation expenses.
- Refund with interest: The company must refund the ₹5 purchase price with 6% annual interest from April 6, 2022, until payment.
- Manufacturer held responsible: The commission placed responsibility for the shortfall in the sealed packet on PepsiCo.
- Retailer cleared: Metro Cash & Carry India Pvt. Ltd. was not held liable in the complaint.
- Payment deadline: The reported order gives PepsiCo one month to comply, with additional interest provisions for delayed payment.
What Happened in the Lay’s Chips Case?
The dispute began on November 10, 2020, when Chandrabhan Jalan purchased groceries from Metro Cash & Carry India Pvt. Ltd. in Jaipur’s Vishwakarma Industrial Area. Among the items was a ₹5 packet of Lay’s potato chips, which he had purchased to serve to guests at home.
According to the complaint, the sealed packet felt unusually light. Jalan checked its weight and found that it contained only 4 grams of chips, although the packaging declared a net weight of 15 grams.
The difference amounted to 11 grams, meaning the packet contained approximately 73.3% less than the declared quantity. Put another way, the reported contents represented only about 26.7% of the stated net weight.
Jalan subsequently raised the matter with the retailer. After the dispute remained unresolved, he filed Consumer Complaint No. 160/2022 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on April 6, 2022, seeking relief under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Why Was PepsiCo Held Responsible?
The retailer acknowledged the purchase but argued that it should not be responsible for a manufacturing or packaging defect inside an intact, sealed packet. Its position was that any shortfall in the quantity filled at the factory would fall under the manufacturer’s responsibility.
PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., the manufacturer named in the complaint, did not appear before the commission despite receiving legal notice. The commission initiated ex parte proceedings against the company on July 22, 2022.
PepsiCo later applied to have the ex parte order set aside, but the commission dismissed that application on November 8, 2023, according to the case reporting.
In reaching its decision, the commission relied on the complainant’s purchase documents and other evidence, which the manufacturer had not contested during the proceedings. It concluded that the responsibility for the shortfall in the sealed packet lay with the manufacturer.
The commission dismissed the complaint against Metro Cash & Carry, distinguishing the retailer’s role from the manufacturing and packaging process.
How Much Must PepsiCo Pay?
The commission’s reported order separates compensation for the consumer’s inconvenience from the refund of the product’s purchase price.
| Component | Amount or rate | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Compensation for mental distress | ₹5,000 | For the inconvenience and mental harassment suffered by the complainant |
| Litigation expenses | ₹3,000 | To cover the cost of pursuing the complaint |
| Total compensation and costs | ₹8,000 | Payable to the complainant |
| Product refund | ₹5 | Refund of the packet’s purchase price |
| Interest on refund | 6% annually | From April 6, 2022, until payment |
| Compliance period | One month | Deadline reported in the order |
The commission also specified that failure to pay the ₹8,000 within the prescribed period would attract additional interest at 6% annually on that amount, calculated from the date of the order until actual payment.
The order is notable because the product itself cost only ₹5, while the compensation and legal expenses totalled ₹8,000. The financial relief reflects the commission’s assessment of the complaint and the proceedings, rather than simply the value of the missing chips.
What the Ruling Means for Packaged Consumer Goods
The case draws attention to the difference between the quantity declared on packaging and the quantity actually supplied. Packaged goods are sold on the basis of stated details such as net weight, price and product identity. A substantial discrepancy can undermine the consumer’s ability to receive what was advertised and paid for.
The reported shortfall in this case was particularly large: 11 grams out of a declared 15 grams. The commission treated the evidence as sufficient to hold the manufacturer responsible in this particular dispute.
However, the decision should not be interpreted as establishing that every underweight packet automatically results in the same compensation. The outcome of a consumer complaint depends on the evidence, applicable law, procedural history and the findings made by the relevant authority.
The ruling nevertheless illustrates that consumers can challenge serious discrepancies even when the product is inexpensive. The low price of an item does not, by itself, remove a manufacturer’s responsibility to meet applicable packaging and consumer-protection requirements.
What Consumers Can Do When a Packet Is Underweight
Consumers who suspect that a packaged product contains substantially less than its declared net weight can take several practical steps.
- Keep the packaging: Preserve the packet, including its weight declaration, batch details, manufacturing information and other printed particulars.
- Retain the purchase proof: Keep the bill or receipt, where available, to establish when and where the product was purchased.
- Document the discrepancy: Photograph or record the product and its weight. A reliable measurement should distinguish the product’s net weight from the weight of the packaging.
- Contact the seller or manufacturer: Raise the issue through the company’s customer-care channel and retain the complaint reference and response.
- Escalate if unresolved: Consumers in India can seek guidance through the National Consumer Helpline and consider filing a complaint through the appropriate consumer dispute redressal mechanism.
A single complaint does not establish that an entire product line is underweight. Nevertheless, preserving evidence and reporting a specific discrepancy can help the relevant company or authority investigate whether a manufacturing, filling or packaging problem occurred.
The Bigger Picture
The Jaipur ruling places a spotlight on a basic but important consumer-protection principle: the quantity declared on a package should correspond to the product supplied, subject to applicable legal requirements and tolerances. Manufacturers of mass-market products serve large numbers of customers, so reliable packaging and quality-control processes matter even when each individual purchase is inexpensive.
The case also demonstrates why consumer commissions can be important for resolving disputes involving relatively small purchases. The cost of a product may be minimal, but consumers can still seek a remedy when they believe they have received less than what was promised. The broader significance lies in accountability, evidence-based complaints and the responsibility of businesses to meet their declared product specifications.
FAQs
1. Why did the Jaipur Consumer Commission order PepsiCo to pay compensation?
The commission found that a sealed Lay’s packet declared to contain 15 grams of chips reportedly contained only 4 grams. It held PepsiCo responsible for the shortfall and ordered compensation and litigation expenses totalling ₹8,000, along with a refund of the purchase price with interest.
2. How much compensation was ordered?
PepsiCo was ordered to pay ₹5,000 for mental distress and inconvenience and ₹3,000 for litigation expenses, totalling ₹8,000. The ₹5 purchase price must also be refunded with 6% annual interest from the date the complaint was filed until payment.
3. When was the Lay’s packet purchased?
The complainant, Chandrabhan Jalan, purchased the packet on November 10, 2020, from Metro Cash & Carry India Pvt. Ltd. in Jaipur’s Vishwakarma Industrial Area.
4. Was the retailer also held responsible?
No. According to the reported decision, the commission dismissed the complaint against Metro Cash & Carry and placed responsibility for the shortfall inside the sealed packet on PepsiCo, the manufacturer.
5. What should consumers do if a packaged product is underweight?
Consumers should preserve the packet and purchase receipt, document the discrepancy carefully, contact the seller or manufacturer, and escalate the complaint through an appropriate consumer grievance channel if necessary.
Looking Ahead
The reported order reinforces the importance of accurate weight declarations and quality control in packaged consumer goods. Its practical impact will depend on compliance with the commission’s directions and whether the decision is challenged or otherwise modified through any subsequent legal proceedings.
For consumers, the case is a reminder to preserve evidence when a product appears substantially different from its declared specifications. For manufacturers, it underlines the importance of preventing filling and packaging errors, maintaining quality-control records and responding promptly when customers raise credible complaints.
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
