BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

C.C NO-16/2020

Present-Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Smita Tripathy,Member (W).

Maya Tiwari, aged about 58 years,

W/O-Ananta Deo Tiwari,

At/P.O- Ramjee Pada,

Ward No-7, P.O/P.S-Kuchinda,

Dist-Sambalpur.                                                                   …..Complainant

Vrs.

1. Chairman & Managing Director,

Sriveda Sattva Pvt. Ltd,

2. Rishab Agrawal,

Vidhi Vidhan Logistics,

Dhanawat Complex,Mahatab Road.

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant:-  Sri P.P.Panigarhi,Advocate.
2. For the O.P-1      :-         Sri. B.B.Pattnaik,Advocate & Associates.
3. For the O.P-2      :-         Sri. S.K. Mohanty, Advocate & Associates.

DATE OF HEARING : 22.02.2021, DATE OF ORDER : 22.03.2021

SRI DIPAK KUMAR MAHAPATRA, PRESIDENT:-Brief facts of the case is that the Complainant on dtd 31^st August 2019  purchased certain products from the O.P-2 amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- vide Invoice No-SSP/0112/18-1927.08.2017. That the Complainant is handicapped (partially blind )unemployed lady being motivated by the O.Ps through their franchise/dealer, agreed to sell their products to earn her livelihood. She taken loan of Rs.1,00,000/- @ 5% interest from market. The O.Ps made push sale of their unwanted products (almost all of them are either expired or to be expired soon) to the Complainant on 31^st August 2019  amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- vide Invoice No-SSP/0112/18-19(documents attached)On receiving the above products and through inspection of those products the Complainant served notices to the O.P-2 repeatedly on dtd. 06.09.2018, 21.10.2018, 11.11.2018 through her Advocate Kailash Kumar Agrawal describing the details of the matter and the unfair trade practice of the officers/executives/managers engaged by the O.P-1 & 2  for the redressal  of the disputes.  But the O.P-2 started to give evasive reply through his counsel on dtd. 12.10.2019, 10.12.2019 and 24.12.2019. Finding no other way the Complainant sought relief from this commission as prayed in the complaint petition.

The O.P-1 stated that he is the manufacturer of products which are being distributed by the O.P-2 who is the super stockist of the O.P-1 and supposed to ensure adequate and prompt supply of the products to the distributors and failure to meet the demand of the distributors would amount to a material breach of the agreement between the parties. Te O.P-2 was entrusted to supply products at his own risks and responsibility and the O.P-1.The O.P-1 is unaware about the supply of expiry and near expiry products used for medicinal purpose, push sale of slow moving products or dumping of the same  and restoring to not to taking back these unwanted and defective goods as the O.p-1 never releases such type of goods. He denied the allegation of alluring the Complainant any way for franchise/dealer for selling their products. The O.P-1 has not engaged any officers/executives/managers to supply their products.  As the products are purchased by the Complainant for the purpose of resale/ commercial purpose and the dealership/franchises/ distributorship is for her livelihood is false. Hence the Complaint petition is not maintainable and deserved to be dismissed.

The O.P-2 denied the allegation that he has not supplied expired or to be expired soon products to the Complainant on 31^st August 2019  amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- vide Invoice No-SSP/0112/18-19. He has only supplied the products as per the order placed by the Complainant under proper invoice which were of supreme quality. The O.P-2 had tried to redress the grievance of the Complainant by making offer for refund the money in exchange of expiry goods if any but she ignore the O.P-2 with some ulterior motive. But the O.P-2 is ready to settle the matter amicably with the Complainant before the Hon’ble Commission.

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act-2019?
2. Whether the O.Ps has committed any Unfair Trade Praxtice as well as Restrictive Trade Practice to the Complainant?

From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant comes under the purview of Consumers as he has purchased purchased certain products from the O.P-2 amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- intends to sell these and earn her livelihood in return. On verification of record we listed some product details as under-

Sl. No  Product’s Name                     MFG date        Bill  Date         Expiry date    Duration

1          Lemon Pickel                         May-18           26.03.19         Apr-19            1 month

2          Kesar Badam Buisciuts         01.03.19         do                    01.06.19         3months

3          Mouth Freshner                    Feb-17            28.01.19         Jan-19             2 days

4.         Kesar Badam Buisciuts         17.01.18         28.01.19         17.10.18         Expired

5.         Foot Cream                            Feb-17            27.11.18         Jan-19             2months

6.         Amla Juice                              Oct-17             31.08.18         Jan-19             3 months

 From the above we observe that the products are already expired or approaching to expired in a short period. It is presumed to be difficult on the part of the Complainant to sell it within very short period as some products are slow moving having lesser demand in the market. It is the duty of the supplier/distributor should take necessary steps to avoid the unnecessary accumulation of products with the retailer. In the present case the O.P-2 have shifted his burden deliberately to the Complainant in delivering the defective and ready to expire goods taking advantage of her helplessness condition. Though she raised voice through her Advocate the same was remained unheard by the O.P-2. Hence we opined that the O.P-2 has committed deficiency in service along with unfair trade practice to the Complainant. Hence we order as under:-

ORDER

That the Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P-2 is directed to take back the unsold expired or to be expired soon product from the Complainant  and refund the price of the products taken at the beginning. Further the O.P-2 is directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) by way of compensation to the Complainant for causing him mental, physical and financial loss and agony and Rs. 5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand) as litigation costs. This amount shall be paid by the O.P-2 to the Complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, failing which the O.P-2 shall pay interest @ 9% per annum on this amount from the date of filing the complaint, i.e., 21.07.2020 till its realisation."

Order pronounced in the open Court today i.e, on 15^th day of March 2021 under my hand and seal of this Commission.

Office is directed to supply copies of the Order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.

I agree,

-sd/-(22.03.2021)                                                                                                       -sd/-(22.03.2021)

        Smt. S.Tripathy                                                                                                         Sri. D.K. Mahapatra

        MEMBER.(W)                                                                             PRESIDENT

                                                                                   Dictated and Corrected

                                                                             by me.

                                                                        -sd/-(22.03.2021)

                                                                                                Sri. D.K. Mahapatra

                                                                         PRESIDENT