DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA.
Complaint No. CC/15/57 of 10/03/2015
Decided on 20/07/2015
Rajinder Singh S/o Late Jaswant Singh Resident of 7-B, Majithia Enclave, Patiala-147005.
….Complainant.
Versus
1. Amrit Dairy, Opp. Power Colony, Chatha Market, Badungar Patiala.
2. Mrs. Bectors Food Specialities Ltd., Theing Road Phillaur 144410 Distt. Jalandhar (Pb.)
….Opposite parties.
Complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the
Consumer Protection Act.
QUORUM
Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member
Smt. Sonia Bansal, Member
Present:
For Complainant : Sh. Rajinder Singh in person.
For Opposite party no.1 : Ex-parte.
For Opposite party no. 2 : Sh. Baljinder Singh Advocate
ORDER
NEELAM GUPTA, MEMBER:
1. The complainant purchased four packets of Cremica Cashew Cookies @ Rs.5/- per packet, each packet weighing 45 Gms, batch no.BD06 B0509, manufacturing date being January 2015 from OP no.1 and out of these four packets, one packet was found of less weight by 34% and the details of the product are as under:-
“MRP Rs.5.00, Net weight 45 grams, Batch no.BD06B0509, MFD. dt.Jan.2015”
2. It was found that the packet weighed only 29 grams as against 45 grams mentioned on the packet. It is further alleged by the complainant that by selling these packets weighing less by 34 % in weight, the company has fleeced the consumer by its unfair trade practice. It is further alleged that the reason for such happening is not on account of faulty weighing machines as all these machines are highly sensitive to meet the International Standards and there is in-built automatic rejection programme if a packet of lesser weight does pass on the belt. The only reason is that the company was packing other product weighing 30 gms and when the packing product and the wrappers for the next product to be packed where changed, the weighing command was not changed and it resulted in sending packets of lesser weight in the market for the consumers. All the consumers spread over can not come together to file a single complaint and therefore the complainant claims Rs.2 lac by way of compensation as a deterrent lesson to the OPs, so that the Ops may not repeat the practice again. Hence the complaint.
3. The cognizance of the complaint was taken against OP no.2 only. On notice OP appeared and filed the written version. The only objection raised by the OP is that the complainant has not produced the Invoice of the said packets so purchased and has also failed to prove as to who purchased the said product to have been manufactured by OP. The complainant has made a concocted story only to black mail OP no.2. After denying all other allegations of the complaint, going against the OP, it was prayed to dismiss the complaint.
4. In support of his complaint, the complainant produced in evidence Ex.CA, his sworn affidavit along with document Ex.C-1 and closed the evidence.
5. On the other hand, on behalf of the OP, its counsel tendered in evidence Ex.OPA, the sworn affidavit of Sh. Parveen Kumar Goyal, Director of M/s Bectors Food and closed its evidence.
6. OP no.2 filed the written arguments. We have gone through the same, heard the complainant in person, the ld. counsel for OP and gone through the evidence on record.
7. Ex.C-1 is the hand bill dt. 7/3/2015 issued by OP no.1 regarding the sale of one Desi Ghee, two bottles of Pepsi and four packets of Cremica Cashew Cookies of Rs.5.00 each. It is the plea taken up by the OP that the complainant has failed to produce the invoice so as to show the purchaser of the product. The complainant has made a reference of the bill dt. 7/3/2015 in which four packets of Cremica Cashew Cookies for Rs.20/- are included in the amount of the entire bill of Rs.490/-. No evidence has been lead by the OP that the bill Ex.C-1 was not issued by OP no.1. Therefore, it cannot be said that complainant had not purchased four packets of Cremica Cashew Cookies for a consideration from OP no.1. Also when the complaint was presented before us, the complainant had produced the original packet bearing batch no.BD06B0509 manufactured in the month of January 2015 along with electronic digital weighing machine, which was found in order by us as the same started with Zero. On weighing the packet, the weight of the same was found to be only 28 gms and thus the same was found to be less in weight by 17 grams. The packet was retained by us in a cardboard box affixed with a paper seal bearing the signatures of the President and the other member Smt. Neelam Gupta and the same remained in the custody of the Ahlmad of this Forum. The OP never asked for weighing the packet.
8. The very fact that the OP has not challenged the authenticity of the weight of the product, would go to show that it was an unfair trade practice on the part of the OP to have sold the product containing less weight.
9. The complainant has not been able to show any loss suffered by him except the packet of cashew cookies being less in weight. Weighing less in weight amounted to unfair trade practice on the part of OP.
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered view that the act on the part of OP no.2 in having contained less weight of 17 gms in the packet of cashew cookies, amounts to unfair trade practice and the consumer has got to be reasonably compensated on account of the harassment and loss suffered by him. After going through the facts of the case, it would be reasonable to award the complainant with a compensation in a sum of Rs.8,000/- which is inclusive of the costs of the complaint. The complaint is accepted against OP no.2 and the OP is directed to make the payment of the same within a period of one month from the receipt of the copy of the order.
Pronounced
Dated: 20/07/2015
Sonia Bansal Neelam Gupta
Member Member
