Woman wins Rs 35,000 after clinic gives ‘standard’ plan instead of ‘personalised’ diet

4 min readNew DelhiJul 16, 2026 07:00 PM IST

Consumer court orders a refund after a Chandigarh diet clinic failed to deliver a promised personalised diet plan. (AI-generated image)

The Chandigarh district consumer commission found a city-based diet clinic guilty of deficient service after it provided a woman with a generic diet chart instead of the personalised package she paid for. The clinic was ordered to pay Rs 35,000, which includes a refund and Rs 7,000 in compensation for mental agony and harassment.

President Pawanjit Singh and B.M. Sharma (member) on a complaint filed by a 27-year-old woman who bought a personalised diet package on August 26 2024, from SG Diet Clinic Private Limited (Diet Clinic), allegedly run by dietician Shreya Goel.

“It is clear that the opposite parties (SG Diet Clinic), after receiving a substantial payment from the complainant, failed to provide the promised personalised diet service. This amounts to a deficiency in service on the part of the clinic. Accordingly, they are liable to refund the amount paid by the complainant,” the July 1 order read.

Diet clinic’s tall claim

The woman, a resident of Chandigarh, engaged the services of the clinic allegedly after their representative made some “tall” claims that she would get a personalised daily dietary package.  Accordingly, she made a payment of Rs 28,000 on August 26, 2024, to get the said diet.

Instead of a personalised plan, the woman alleged that she was given a standard diet chart and denied appointments, with her requests for alternatives and follow-ups going unanswered.

The woman stated that the clinic initially admitted liability and asked for her bank details to process a refund, but later denied having any refund policy at all, even though no enrollment form had been executed at that stage.

The woman was represented by advocate Arjun Dosanj, who argued that despite paying Rs 28,000, his client was given only a standard diet chart and that her repeated requests for appointments and alternatives went unanswered.

Story continues below this ad

Non-refundable fee

The healthcare and wellness clinic, in its written response, argued that the case should be dismissed because the woman did not have a valid legal reason to sue it.

They admitted that the woman engaged their services on August 26, 2024, and claimed the first week’s diet package was duly conveyed to her on August 28, 2024.

As evidence, the clinic shared WhatsApp chats from August 28, 2024, to prove the woman asked for her money back despite signing an enrollment agreement two days earlier.

The clinics, represented by advocate Gurcharan Singh, argued that the woman had signed an enrollment form after being fully informed of the terms and conditions, and that the fee was non-refundable since it included several taxes already deposited with the authorities.

Story continues below this ad

‘Narrow dispute’

The commission noted that the woman had paid Rs 28,000 for the diet package, and that the dispute was “narrow”: whether the clinic’s failure to send a personalised chart and refusal to refund amounted to deficiency in service.

It observed that just three days after receiving the payment, when the woman sought an appointment on August 29, 2024, the clinic “attempted to delay the matter and asked the complainant to wait”.

The commission held that this showed that the clinic failed to attend to the woman’s concerns properly despite receiving a “substantial” amount, and that they did not refund the money even after obtaining her account details.

Penalty on clinic

The commission ordered the clinic to refund Rs 28,000 to the woman, carrying a simple interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of payment, along with the payment of Rs 7,000 as compensation for mental agony, harassment, and litigation costs.

Story continues below this ad

It was added that the diet clinic should pay the said compensation within 45 days, failing which the amount will attract penal interest at 12 per cent per annum instead of 9 per cent, till realisation.

Takeaway

This ruling highlights that wellness clinics cannot make tall promises of personalised service to attract customers and then fall back on generic packages and non-refundable clauses when they fail to deliver.

Consumers facing grievances may contact their respective state consumer helplines (Chandigarh helpline: 1800 300 11 007) or call the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.

Written by Avinash Verma (Avinash is an intern with The Indian Express)

Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape.

Expertise

Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen.

Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on:

Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts.

Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy.

Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More

Tags:

balanced diet

chandigarh

diet chart

healthy diet