Coming Up Sat 5:00 PM  AEDT
Coming Up Live in 
Live
Hindi radio

Sangeeta Guru Awarded $90,000 in Damages by Court

Sangeeta Guru Source: Facebook

Sangeeta Guru had claimed more than $1 million in damages for economic loss, domestic assistance and out-of-pocket expenses.

A 40-year-old Indian-origin beautician, Sangeeta Guru, was awarded $90,130 in damages.

A NSW District Court judge found that Coles was negligent and failed to address the risk of harm posed by grapes on the floor.

Sangeeta was walking in the fruit and vegetable section of a Coles supermarket in Sydney west on 19 October 2012 when she slipped on a grape.

This caused a sudden fall on the floor and injury to her leg, knees and jarring her back.

The Court heard that while on the floor, Sangeeta looked at the bottom of her thongs and found some squashed grape.

She also found more grapes on the floor nearby.

An employee came to her aid and told Sangeeta that she had been on her tea break.

"I am always out on the floor and constantly checking the grape display as I know how often they are dropped by customers," the employee told the court.

The court was told that Sangeeta still continues to suffer pain from soft tissue injuries.

"She has become an unhappy person. Her sleep is also impaired," Judge Leonard Levy said in his judgment.

Coles unsuccessfully argued there was "contributory negligence" on Sangeeta's part., saying she should have been looking where she was going.

This means that she should have been looking where she was going.

The Age reports that Judge Levy noted Sangeeta admitted she wasn't looking at the floor as she walked.

But that was not a reasonable expectation in a big supermarket.

"The plaintiff was looking around her for items to purchase. Her surroundings were a supermarket where goods were attractively displayed to induce customers to select particular items for purchase," said Judge Levy.

Sangeeta Guru had claimed more than $1 million in damages for economic loss, domestic assistance and out-of-pocket expenses.

Judge Levy found she was not entitled to damages for past economic loss, loss of superannuation, nor for domestic assistance.