Complaint presented on : 28.12.2012
Order pronounced on : 18.03.2016
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L., PRESIDENT
TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L., MEMBER II
FRIDAY THE 18th DAY OF MARCH 2016
C.C.NO.03/2013
T.S.Radhakrishnan aged about 87 years,
No.5050/1, “H” Block,
25th Street, Annanagar West,
Chennai – 600 040. ..... Complainant
..Vs..
| | - Health India Laboratories,
(A Unit of Noni Biotech Pvt.Ltd.,) 16, M.G.R. Street, Sholinganallur, Chennai – 600 119. 2.Mr.Peter, Proprietor/Partner, Health India Laboratories, 16, M.G.R.Street, Sholinganallur, Chennai – 600 119. 3.Vanaja Agencies, 421 – B, P.H.Road, N.S.K. Nagar Bus Stop, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. | |
| | ...Opposite Parties | |
Date of complaint : 03.01.2013
Counsel for Complainant :Dr.T.M.Kannan
Counsel for 1st & 2nd opposite party : M/S. Md. Rafi & Deepasri
Counsel for 3rd opposite Party : Ex parte
O R D E R
BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.SC., B.L.,
This complaint is filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.
1.THE COMPLANT IN BRIEF:
The complainant had purchased from the 3rd Opposite Party a 500ml bottle of Divine “NONI” on 15.05.2012 on the recommendation of the 3rd Opposite Party that if the product is regularly taken, it would relieve him of his daily ailments and he will look younger every day. The complainant regularly consumed the product everyday and did not have any effect. Suddenly on 10.06.2012 he had complaints of loose motion, drowsiness, stomach enlargement and had face swelling. He had become unconscious, due to which his daughter had to rush home on getting the message and took him to Billroth Hospital in an ambulance where he was admitted as an in-patient for nearly 4 days. He was under constant observation by consultants Dr.J.H.Balasingh and Dr.U.Illaaraja both specialists in their respective departments and after his condition improved was discharged and returned back home in an ambulance on 14.06.2012. The duty Doctor has informed that his condition was due to the intake of Divine NONI which he was taking as a medicine as prescribed by the 3rd Opposite Party herein, since 15.05.2012 and that before that he was normal in health. The complainant spent about Rs.3, 00,000/- for his medical treatment till date and no fault of him except to take NONI regularly. The complainant has undergone both physically and mentally including the monetary loss due to consumption of NONI. The complainant caused a legal notice dated 09.10.2012 to the Opposite Parties about his suffering and the same was replied by the Opposite Parties and complainant also gave a rejoinder to their reply. Since the complainant was not satisfied with their reply he filed this complaint for compensation and for incurring medical expenses and mental agony with cost of the complaint.
2. The 3rd Opposite Party remained Ex parte.
WRITTERN VERSION OF THE 1st & 2nd OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:
The 1st Opposite Party is a manufacturing unit and the 2nd Opposite Party is the Chairman of the 1st Opposite Party. The 1st and 2nd Opposite Parties are the manufacturers of fruit juice extract, fruit juice concentrate, ready to serve fruit beverages and various health oriented products under various brand names among them one is Divine NONI, which is one of the brands, under whose name fruit juice extract or concentrate extracted from the fruit known as NONI or Morinda Citrifolia is packed and marketed. The product divine NONI fruit juice extract/concentrate is a dietary supplement, which has gained reputation in national and international market because of its efficacy as a dietary supplement. The said product has been enjoying reputation in the market for more than a decade and till date. The product Divine NONI fruit juice extract is packaged in PET bottles bearing unique design, in volumes of 400 ml and 800 ml. The bottle is packaged inside the carton box of golden colour. The 3rd opposite Party is not a dealer/distributor of the product of the 1st Opposite Party, when the product was allegedly purchased by the complainant from the 3rd opposite Party. Therefore the very sale of the “NONI” drink by the 3rd opposite Party to the complainant appears that it has not emanated from the 1st opposite Party. In the complaint, wherein it is mentioned simply as “Noni syrup 500ml”. The 1st opposite Party never packed their product in such a quantity of 500ml. It is reiterated that their packages are in the bottles of 400ml and 800ml. Therefore the product purchased by the complainant from the 3rd opposite Party does not belong to the one manufactured and packed by the 1st opposite Party. He has not produced the bottle with the carton box alleged to have been manufactured and purchased by Opposite Party as a specimen in this complaint. Moreover the invoice mentioned above does not specify the batch number and date of manufacture of the product NONI. There is a clear mention in the instruction leaflet about the method of consuming the product to get the maximum effectiveness and benefit out of the same. The complainant would have consumed some other food, a day or two prior to 10.06.2012 when he is allegedly said to be admitted in the hospital. The discharge summary reflects that the complainant is a patient of Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetic Nephropathy and chronic kidney disease. The complainant has not proved that he fell sick due to consumption of NONI and therefore the complainant is not entitled to any relief and prays to dismiss the complaint.
3.POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what relief?
4.POINT:1
The case of the complainant is that on 15.05.2012 he had purchased a 500 ml bottle of Divine NONI under Ex A1 from the 3rd Opposite Party as recommended by him and while he consumed the product for a fortnight suddenly he fell sick on 10.06.2012 with complaints of loose motion, drowsiness, stomach enlargement and face swelling he had become unconscious then he was immediately admitted in the Billroth Hospital and after treatment he was discharged after 4 days as per Ex.A2 discharge summary and due to the consumption of NONI now he is unable to walk and his health become deteriorated and fell sick proves that the product is having deficiency and therefore prays to award compensation.
5.The 1st and 2nd Opposite Party contented that the 3rd Opposite Party is not the dealer of the 1st Opposite Party and further they used to manufacture the quantity of product only 400ml and 800 ml and whereas the complainant alleged to have purchased 500ml under Ex.A1 proves that the product purchased under Ex.A1 is not manufactured by the 1st and 2nd opposite Party and further their product has been accepted nationwide and no one suffered and further the complainant has not proved the product purchased by him is a defective one by sending analysis and therefore prays to dismiss the complaint.
6. According to the complainant he purchased 500 ml bottle of Divine NONI under Ex.A1 from the 3rd Opposite Party. Ex.A1 proves that the product mentioned therein sold by the 3rd Opposite Party with a quantity of 500ml. However it is a specific case of the Opposite Party 1 & 2 in the written version that they are not manufacturing 500 ml NONI Syrup and their packages is only 400 ml and 800 ml quantities and to strengthen the case of the 1st and 2nd opposite Party marked Ex.B1, carton box of the bottle shows only 400 ml. When the 1st and 2nd Opposite Party manufacturer specifically contended that they are not manufacturing 500 ml NONI syrup, it is for the complainant to prove that the 1st and 2nd opposite Party manufactured 500 ml NONI Syrup as per Ex.A1 to substantiate his case. Except Ex.A1 no other documents filed by the complainant to prove that the 1st and 2nd Opposite Party manufactured 500 ml quantity of NONI Syrup. The Complainant marked additional documents as Ex.A6 to Ex.A20. Ex.A6 is the photograph Divine NONI bottle. Nowhere in the photograph or in any other marked additional document has the quantity had been mentioned. Therefore the additional documents will no way prove that the Opposite Parties manufactured 500 ml quantity of NONI syrup. Therefore it is held that the Complainant has not proved that the product sold under Ex.A1 receipt manufactured by the 1st and 2nd opposite Party.
8. According to the complainant after consuming NONI Syrup for a period of 2 weeks he suddenly had complaints of loose motion, drowsiness, stomach enlargement and face swelling on 10.06.2012 and immediately he was admitted in the Billroth Hospital on the same day and after treatment he was discharged on 14.06.2012. The discharge summary of Billroth Hospital is marked as Ex.A2. In Ex.A2 it is mentioned that the complaints of the complainant and also he was diagnosed in the hospital. In the diagnosed column it is mentioned that the complainant is having
TYPE II – DIABETES MELLITUS
DIABETIC NEPHROPATHY
CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE
VIRAL FEVER
ACUTE GASTROENTERITIS (RECOVERED)
AND ISCHAEMIC HEART LISEASE 9CABG DONE)
Nowhere in the discharge summary, it is stated that due to consumption of NONI syrup the complainant suffered with the diseases mentioned in the discharge summary. Further the complainant has not proved that the NONI Syrup consumed by the complainant is having any poisonous substance or any other substance injured his health or which is not acceptable for the human body by sending the NONI for analysis. Further the Complainant marked Ex.A16 to establish that consumption of NONI causes side effects to health. To support the same no expert evidence adduced by the Complainant. In the absence of expert evidence consumption of NONI causes side effects cannot be accepted and hence Ex.A16 is rejected. Therefore the complainant has miserably failed to prove that due to consumption of the NONI Syrup only his health has been affected and he took treatment. As the Complainant failed to prove that the Opposite Party 1 & 2 manufactured 500 ml quantity of NONI Syrup and also the Complainant failed to establish that the NONI syrup manufactured by the Opposite Parties consumed by the Complainant and that caused ill health to him with sufficient expert evidence and in view of the same, it is held that the Opposite Parties has not committed deficiency in service.
9.POINT:2
Since the Opposite Parties have not committed deficiency in service, the complainant is not entitled for any relief in this complaint and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
In the result the complaint is dismissed. No costs.
Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 18th day of March 2016.
MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.A1 dated 15.05.2012 Invoice for purchase of Devine NONI
Ex.A2 dated 14.06.2012 Discharge Summary
Ex.A3 dated 09.10.2012 Legal Notice sent
Ex.A4 dated 18.10.2012 Reply to the Notice
Ex.A5 dated 15.11.2012 Rejoinder to the reply notice
Ex.A6 dated NIL Photograph of Divine Noni bottle
Ex.A7 dated NIL Blood Glucose Test Report
Ex.A8 dated 01.09.2015 Fees paid for Physiotherapist
Ex.A9 dated NIL Kumudham Reporter Xerox copy
Ex.A10 dated NIL List of Rejected files
Ex.A11 dated NIL Application and reply under RTI Act
Ex.A12 dated NIL Order
Ex.A13 dated NIL Clinical Trail Details
Ex.A14 dated NIL Copy of the advertising standard council of India
Ex.A15 dated NIL Copy of the Polyols – Information and sugar
Alcohols
Ex.A16 dated NIL Copy of the Side effects of Noni juice
Ex.A17 dated NIL Xerox copy of the Diabetes Monitor
Ex.A18 dated 25.08.2015 Advertisement made in Dinamalar
Ex.A19 dated 12.09.2015 Certificate issued by Hi-Cure Acupuncture Centre
Ex.A20 dated 08.09.2015 News in The Hindu
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY:
Ex.B1 dated NIL Cotton Box
Ex.B2 dated NIL Catalogue of NONI
Ex.B3 dated 08.10.2012 Legal Notice
MEMBER – II PRESIDENT
