Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

CC/18/2016

Mohit Marwaha - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bisleri international Pvt LTd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh Taveesh Goyal

26 May 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHGARH SAHIB.

Consumer Complaint  No.18 of 2016

                                                                                                  Date of institution : 05.02.2016                

                                                                                              Date of decision    :  26.05.2017

Mohit Marwaha, son of Sh. Vijay Marwaha, resident of Sector 2-A, House No.253, Sham Nagar, Mandi Gobindgarh, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib.

……..Complainant

Versus

1. Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd. Western Express Highway, Andheri(East), Mumbai-400099.
2. Asianlak Health Foods Ltd., VPO Jandali, Near Kohara, Chandigarh Road, Ludhiana-141112.
3. Kulwant Karyana Store, Main Bazar, opposite Amloh Aggarwal Shop, Mandi Gobindgarh, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgar Sahib.

…..Opposite Parties

Complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act.                                               

Quorum

Sh. Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President                 

 Sh. Inder Jit, Member

 

Present :        Sh. Taveesh Goyal, Adv.Cl. for the complainant.

                      Opposite party No.1 exparte.

                      Sh. T.S.Kang, Av.Cl. for OP No.2.

                      Sh. G.S.Saini, Adv.Cl.for OP No.3.                    

ORDER

 

By Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President

                      Complainant, Mohit Marwaha, son of Sh. Vijay Marwaha, resident of Sector 2-A, House No.253, Sham Nagar, Mandi Gobindgarh, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib, has filed this complaint against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as the OPs) under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act. The brief facts of the complaint are as under:

2.         The complainant purchased the Pet Bisleri Bottles Crate from OP No.3  but OP No.3 did not issue any bill regarding the said crate of bottles despite the request of the complainant and, therefore, the complainant was unaware about the exact date of purchasing the said bottles.  In the month of January 2016, the complainant noticed dust particles inside the six sealed bisleri water pet bottles. The batch number of the said six bisleri water pet bottles, 250 Ml each, is LU. B.No.257 and the packing date is mentioned as 14.09.2015. It is further stated that in case the complainant consume the water of said six pet bottles containing the dust particles without seeing the same trusting on the brand of the OPs, then it may cause danger to the life of the complainant.  It is further stated that OP No.3 refused to issue the bill/invoice of the said bottles by saying that OPs No.1 & 2 did not allow him to issue the bill in respect of pet bisleri bottles to any consumer/buyer. This act and conduct of the OPs amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The complainant also served a legal notice on OPs but in vain. Hence, this complaint for giving directions to the OPs to pay Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for mental tension, pain, agony and harassment suffered by the complainant and Rs.15,000/- as litigation charges.

3.         Notice of the complaint was issued to the OPs. But OP No.1 chose not to appear to contest this complaint despite service. Hence, OP No.1 was proceeded against exparte.

4.         The complaint is contested by OPs No. 2 & 3. In reply to the complaint, OP No.2 raised preliminary objections, inter alia, that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form. As regards the fact of the complaint, OP No.2 stated that OP No.3 is neither its dealer nor it has ever supplied the product to OP No.3. It further stated that after receipt of legal notice it got the entire batch checked from its technicians and no such impurity as alleged by the complainant came to light. Every product of OP No.2 bears the manufacturing date and "best before" consumption date. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OP No.2. After denying the other averments made in the complaint, it prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

5.         In reply to the complaint, OP No.3 raised certain preliminary objections, inter alia, that the present complaint is not maintainable and the same is false, fake and fictitious. As regards the facts of the complaint, OP No.3 stated that the complainant did not purchase any Bisleri Bottles from OP No.3. It is further stated that OP No.3 is neither the manufacturer nor the supplier of Bisleri water bottles. As such, there is no deficiency and unfair trade practice on its part. After denying the other averments made in the complaint, OP No.3 prayed for dismissal of complaint.

6.         No evidence was tendered by the complainant despite several opportunities. Hence, evidence of the complainant was closed by order. OP No.2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh. V.K. Sharma, Ex. OP2/1, authority letter Ex. OP2/2, reply to legal notice Ex. OP2/3, legal notice Ex. OP2/4 and closed the evidence. OP No.3 tendered in evidence affidavit of Aminder Singh as Ex. OP3/1 and closed the evidence.

7.         Learned counsel for the complainant verbally argued that the water in the bottle was contaminated as it could be seen by naked eyes. He further argued that the expert report of the water department cannot be accepted as the concerned lab was not fully equipped to analyze in detail. Learned counsel pleaded  that OP No.3 refused to issue the bill/invoice of the said bottles by stating that OP No.1 & 2 do not allow him to issue bill with regard to pet bisleri bottles to any consumer. He submitted that the present complaint deserves to be accepted and heavy compensation be granted against the OPs for unfair trade practice. In support of his contentions, the Ld. counsel relied on the following citations:-

a)   Yashpal Singh VS. Easyday & another, decided on 03.02.2014 by Hon'ble State Commission, Punjab in FA No.376 of 2012.

b)   Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Sanjeev Kumar, decided on 18.09.2012 by Hon'ble State Commission, Uttrakhand in FA No.268 of 2010.

c)   M/s Asian Lak Health Foods Ltd. Vs. Pritpal Singh, decided on 04.06.2014 by Hon'ble State Commission, Punjab in FA No.1127 of 2011.

8.         On the other hand, Learned counsel for OP no.2 & 3 stated that complainant has failed to lead his evidence before this Forum thus his complaint deserves to be dismissed. He pleaded that it is ample clear from the report of Water and Sanitation Department, Fatehgarh Sahib, received vide letter No.1856 dated 28.04.2016, that the said water was found to be in potable condition and it was safe for consumption. Learned counsel argued that complainant has failed to place any material on record in order to prove his pleadings.

9.         Learned counsel for OP No.3 objected to the submissions made by Learned counsel for the complainant. He stated that the said pet bottles were never purchased from OP No.3 and complainant has failed prove his allegations on record.

10.                 After hearing the Learned counsel for the parties and going through the pleadings, evidence, written submissions as well as oral submissions, we find force in the submissions made by the OPs. It is established from the Lab Report of Water and Sanitation Department, Fatehgarh Sahib, received vide letter No.1856 dated 28.04.2016, that the water in the bottles was not found to be contaminated and it was potable, safe for consumption. Further the complainant has failed to rebut the said report by placing on record any material evidence in support of his allegations. The judgments cited by the Ld. counsel for the complainant are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case.

11.                 Accordingly, in view of our aforesaid observation, we find that the OPs have not indulged in any kind of unfair trade practice. We further find that the present complaint is devoid of any merits. Hence the same is hereby dismissed. Parties to bear the costs.    

12.                 The arguments on the complaint were heard on 19.05.2017 and the order was reserved. Now, the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.   

  Pronounced 

Dated: 26.05.2017

(A.P.S.Rajput)        

President

 

(Inder Jit)     

 Member