Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

13/2010

Joker Thulasi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Area Sales Manager/Authorised Signatory - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.R.Dhanalakshmi

07 Mar 2018

ORDER

                                                                                                                       Date of Filing  : 22.12.2009

                                                                          Date of Order : 07.03.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L,                             : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.                                          :  MEMBER-I

      DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

 

CC. NO.13 /2010

WEDNESDAY THE 7^TH DAY OF MARCH 2018                                               

MR. Joker Thulasi,

Cine Actor,

No.1-B, III Cross Street,

N.G.O. Colony,

Valapalani, Chennai 600 026.                               .. Complainant

                                                   ..Vs..

 

1.  Area Sales Manager/Authorized Signatory,

M/s. Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd.,

7/3, Parivakkam Main Road,

Leelavathy Nagar,

Senneerkuppam

Poonamallee,

Chennai 600 056.

 

2. M/s. Bisleri Interanational Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by its Managing Director /

Authorized Signatory,

Registered Office at Western Express

High Way, Andheri (East),

Mumbai 400 099.

 

3. M/s. Bharathi Agencies,

Rep. by the Manager/Authorized Signatory,

No.31/13, Dr.Subarayan Nagar

4^th Street,

Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024.                       ..  Opposite parties.

 

 

Counsel for complainant         :  M/s. R.Dhanalakshmi  

Counsel for opposite parties   :  M/s. C.S.Kiran & anohter

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section  12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards damages as compensation for mental agony and also to pay cost of the complaint.

1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

          The complainant submits that  1^st opposite party is an authorized manufacturer of packaged drinking water in the name of Bisleri.   The 2^nd opposite party is the authroized person of the 1^st opposite party.  The 3^rd opposite party is a supplier of Bislery Packaged drinking water at Vadapalani, C  hennai.   The complainant is utilizing the Bislery drinking water.   Further the complainant state that he is used the said Bislery drinking water regularly and paid the advance amount for packaged drinking water on 5.8.2009.   One Mr. Gopal who is the staff of the opposite party-3 came and supplied a cane of Bislery packaged drinking water on 11.10.2009 to the complainant.  When the complainant opened the said besleri packed drinking water cane cap by putting down on the provided tap pot container on thirsty he drank a tumbler of water.  Immediately after few minutes, the complainant felt head reeling all of a sudden and noticed the opposite parties company supplied cane packaged water and found that there were  insects floating inside the bisleri packaged drinking water cane and the complainant complained the matter to the 1^st opposite party.  Thereafter the complainant went to the  doctor for treatment.    Further the complainant state  that the Supplier Mr.Gopal came and noticed the cane and returned with the person by name V.Vadivel saying himself as Sales representative of the Bisleri company on 12.10.2009 at about 10.30 a.m.   On 13.10.2009 one Mr. V. Santhanaraj as an area sales Manager visted the complainant house and noticed insects floating in the Bislery cane water and filled a bottle of water and taken saying that he would solve the problem in a week consulting the higher officer at Mumbai.  But till now no response.   The complainant issued legal notice Ex.A7 dated  26.10.2009.  The opposite parties  has not sent any reply.  As such the act of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  Hence this complaint is filed.  

2. The brief averments in the written version filed by the opposite parties is as follows:

The  opposite parties deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.  The opposite parties stated that they being in this field more than several years and have been providing good service to their esteemed consumers.  Moreover the entire plant of water purification  is a sterile area and fully air conditioned hence there is no chance for any insect to be there in that area and the water was purified suing Reverse Osmosis method in that process there are three steps of filtration used hence there is also no further chance for any impurities to be mixed with water.   The opposite parties also state that they were never ever approached by the complainant herein, therefore the question of negligence and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party does not arise at all.  They employ only legal and statutorily required standards of production which are monitored.   Hence the allegation that these opposite parties indulged in unfair trade practice is absolute falsehood and per defamatory and without any basis.   The opposite parties also state that  the water in the bubble was not sent for testing and in the absence of such clinical testing it would be a travesty of justice to decide the case solely based on the complainants allegations.  Every allegation has to be proved by documentary and whatever necessary by laboratory testing.  Without such methods no manufacturer can be held of negligence or deficiency in service.  Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite  parties and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.   In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties filed and no document marked on the side of the  opposite parties.

4.      The points for consideration is :

Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for damages and mental agony with cost as prayed for ?

 

 

5.  ON POINT :

          Heard both sides.  Perused the records (viz.) complaint, written version, proof affdiavits and documents.  The learned counsel for the complainant contended that 1^st opposite party is an authorized manufacturer of packaged drinking water in the name of Bisleri.   The 2^nd opposite party is the authorized person of the 1^st opposite party.  The 3^rd opposite party is a supplier of Bislery Packaged drinking water at Vadapalani, chennai.   The complainant is utilizing the Bislery drinking water.  Ex.A3 is the visiting card of the representative; with endorsement.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the complainant used the said Bislery drinking water regularly and paid the advance amount for packaged drinking water on 5.8.2009 as per Ex.A1.   One Mr. Gopal who is the staff of the opposite party-3 came and supplied a cane of Bislery packaged drinking water on 11.10.2009 to the complainant.  But no record.  When the complainant opened the said bisleri packed drinking water cane cap by putting down on the provided tap pot container on thirsty he drank a tumbler of water.  Immediately after few minutes, the complainant felt head reeling all of a sudden and noticed the opposite parties company supplied cane packaged water and found that there were  insects floating inside the bisleri packaged drinking water cane and the complainant complained the matter to the 1^st opposite party.   The complainant kept aside safely in a corner as it was and had taken photos Ex.A6 series.  Thereafter the complainant went to the  doctor for treatment.  Ex.A5 is the prescription slip.   But on a careful perusal of Ex.A6 photos it is seen that the cane having full quantity of water as against the contention of the complainant  that it has been opened and putting down on the dispenser.   Further the complainant contended that the Supplier Mr. Gopal came and noticed the cane and returned with person by name V. Vadivel saying himself as Sales representative of the Bisleri company on 12.10.2009 at about 10.30 a.m. as per Ex.A3.  On 13.10.2009 one Mr. V.Santhanaraj as an area sales Manager visited the complainant house and noticed the insects floating in the bislery cane water and filled a bottle of water and taken saying that he would solve the problem in a week consulting the higher officer at Mumbai.  Ex.A4 is the visiting card.  But till now no response.   The complainant issued legal notice Ex.A7 dated  26.10.2009.  The opposite parties has not sent any reply.  Hence the complainant was constrained to file this case claiming compensation.  

6.   The learned counsel cited a decision reported in

II (2005) CPJ 579

KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE

HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BERVERAGES PVT. LTD & ANR.

VS

RAVISHANKAR

II (2005) CPJ 636

TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

CC. CHELLAPPAN

VS

CHENNAI BOTTLING CO. LTD.,

Held that

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Sections 2 (1) (g), 2 (1)(r ) and 14 (1) – Food and Beverages – Soft drink – Contaminated – Dead insect found inside bottle – Unfair trade practice proved – Compensation granted – O.P. directed not to offer hazardous goods for sale in future.

7.    The learned counsel for the opposite parties contended that for the past several years the opposite parties 1 & 2  providing good service to their esteemed consumers.   Moreover the entire area of the water plant, there is no chance for any insects in that area.   The water was purified using Reverse Osmosis method.    In that process three steps of filtration are used and hence there is no chance for any impurities to be mixed with water.   The complainant has not  produced any record to prove that the opposite parties product in dispute alone used by the complainant  is genuine or not.   Further the contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that they applied only legal and statutorily required standards of production and the plants are continuously monitored.   The complainant allegation that he found foreign substance in the water which he consumed is not acceptable since the complainant failed to mention whether he had kept the water dispenser in a clean condition.   The complainant  has not produced any evidence to prove the said fact that a man by name Gopal who is a staff of the opposite parties came and supplied a cane of Bisleri packaged drinking water on 11.10.2009 to the complainant house and he opened the cane cap by putting down on the provided tap pot container.   On thirsty the complainant and others drank a tumbler of supplied so called Bisleri cane water.  The water dispenser, if used without cleaning may contain foreign substance.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that  the water in the container was not sent for testing and in the absence of such clinical testing it would be a traversity of justice to decide the case solely based on the complainant’s allegations.   If the said product is said to be defective it needs to be sent for laboratory testing as provided for in the act.  Without such procedure no manufacturer can be held for negligence or deficiency in service.  However, the documents filed by the complainant proves the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.60/- towards cost of the Bisleri packaged drinking water cane and shall pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/-  and the point is answered accordingly.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part.  The  opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.60/- (Rupees sixty only) towards cost of the Bisleri packaged drinking water cane and shall pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only)  for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/-  (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The above  amounts shall be payable  within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.                                     

Dictated  by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 7^th day of March 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                       MEMBER-II                              PRESIDENT.

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1- 5.8.2009 – Copy of the receipt issued by 3^rd opposite party.

Ex.A2- 11.10.2009- Copy of the cash bill

Ex.A3-                - Copy of visiting card.

Ex.A4-                -  Copy of visiting card.

Ex.A5- 12.10.2009- Copy of prescription issued by Dr.S.V.Swaminathan

ExA6-                 -  photos showing the Bisleri water cane with insect.

Ex.A7- 26.10.2009- Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A8-                -  Copy of  Ack . Card.    

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES SIDE DOCUMENTS:  Nil

 

 

MEMBER –I                       MEMBER-II                              PRESIDENT.