O R D E R Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member. The case of the complainant is as follows: On 2..9..2008 he had purchased two packets of 300 gms. each soap powder. “Active wheel hold” from the 1st opposite party which was manufactured by the 2nd opposite party as per bill No. 0856325 dt: 2..9..2008. The complainant after using the soap powder the cloths became damaged due to the colour fade. The soap powder was not a good quality material and it was a very old item. The complainant had sustained loss in the tune of damages in 5 shirts priced as -2- Rs. 350/- per shirt. One white cloths worth Rs. 250/- and one cavy dothy worth Rs. 100/- became damage. The complainant informed alleged defects to the 1st opposite party and he entrusted the balance soap powder and a complaint before the 1st opposite party. The first opposite party assured to the complainant that the compensation will be collected from the 2nd opposite party. Thereafter the complainant contacted the opposite party several times but all of them was in vain. The opposite party has not taken any steps to get the compensation. Hence this complainant. The notices were served with the opposite parties. They appeared and filed their version. The version of 1st opposite party contending as follows: The 1st opposite party is the retail out let of Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. and is not having any independent identity other than that of the corporation. There is no dealership contract between 1st opposite party and 2nd opposite party. But the 1st opposite party sells the consumer products of 2nd opposite party which is supplied from the depot of Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. The allegation that the complainant had purchased 2 packets of ‘Active Wheel Goli’ of 300 gms. Each which is a product of 2nd opposite party on 2..9..2008 from the opposite party. The description in the bill No. 0856325 itself shows that the purchaser has purchased only one packet of wheel Active weighing 700 gms. The 1st opposite party have not sold 300 gms. Packet to the purchaser according to the bills produced by the complainant. The 1st opposite party neither produce nor manufacture any consumer products. They are not liable to any damage caused -3- by using the products manufactured by other companies. The soap powder alleged to be used by the complainant is not purchased from the 1st opposite party shop. The products available in the shop are of good quantity and sell within the period of expiry. Hence the 1st opposite party has no liability to compensate loss if any sustained to complainant as alleged. The 1st opposite party is keeping complaint register in the out let for recording the complaints of customers and the complainant has not made any complaint as alleged so far. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the 1st opposite party. Hence the complaint may be dismissed with costs. The version of the 2nd opposite party is as follows: The products manufactured by the 2nd opposite party are of good quality and have acquired tremendous goodwill and popularity in the market among the consumers. So as to make the products a household name. As such during the manufacturing process, each product passes through stringent quality control mechanism to ensure the quality of product is of desired standards. The complainant is allegedly an esteemed consumer of our products and in particular “WHEEL ACTIVE” brand. The 2nd opposite party is committed to redress the complainant’s grievances, and would like to extend an offer to the complainant before this Forum 3 packets of the product ie. ‘WHEEL ACTIVE’ detergent powder weighing 300 gms. Each or value of the same promptly in lieu of the products complained against without asking any questions. The complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The opposite party follows stringent -4- quality, checks which are strictly implemented, monitored and audited in all its factories. The quantity and ration of the raw materials used in the production process are monitored and automatic computerized cut off are in operation to ensure that only the fixed ration of raw materials are fed into the machines. The complainant has alleged that he has purchased 2 packets of 300 gms. Each of WHEEL ACTIVE GOLD from the 1st opposite party vide bill No. 0856325 on 2..9..2008. The bill reflects the purchase of only one 700 gms. Pack of WHEEL ACTIVE EASY WASH GREEN. The complainant is trying to adduce a bill stating one product and has alleged the manufacturing of substandard and old soap powder of another product in the complaint. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the 2nd opposite party. Hence the complaint may be dismissed with costs. The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents which are marked as exhibits A1 to A3 series. The 1st and 2nd opposite party filed proof affidavit and documents which are marked as exhibits B1 and B2 in the side of the 1st opposite party. Heard both sides. We have gone through the complaint, version documents and evidences. The case of the complainant is that he purchased soap powder from the 1st opposite party for washing the cloths. After using the soap powder the clothes became defective and not for use. According to him he sustained loss and sufferings. The 1st and 2nd opposite party has taken a contention that they are not done any illegal acts or any deficiency in service. The 1st -5- opposite party alleged that they are only the retailers of the products which was manufactured by the 2nd opposite party and others. So, according to the 1st opposite party they had not done any illegal acts, they can only sell the products which the 2nd opposite party and others entrusted for sale. The 2nd opposite party taken a contention that they are the best manufactures of various products and they are having so many quality testing and monitoring methods against their own products. So, according to the 2nd opposite party the alleged products purchased by the complainant were a good items and there was no defects at all. More over the opposite parties has taken a contention that the alleged purchase of the product was 300 gms. Of “WHEEL ACTIVE GOLD’ two packets. But the opposite party has not disputed the purchase of product by the complainant. The opposite parties submitted that the products was of 700 gms. and not 300 gms. “WHEEL ACTIVE GOLD’. However the complainant produced the alleged defective cloths before this Forum and we examine the cloths and returned it to the complainant. From the examination of the cloths it seen that the most of the items were damaged due to colour fade and colour change. Hence we find that the complainant has not able to use the cloths as good condition. So, the complainant has sustained loss and sufferings. From the version of the 2nd opposite party it can be seen that they are ready and willing to offer 3 packets of “Wheel Active Gold” to the complainant as a redress. From the submission made by the 2nd opposite party in their version it can be seen that they believe that there was some inconveniences caused to the complainant. From the available -6- evidence and documents it can be seen that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the 1st opposite party (Supply co) The alleged products was manufactured by the 2nd opposite party. Hence the 2nd opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant. We have no reasons to disbelieve the case of the complainant. We are of the opinion that the case of the complainant is to be allowed. In the result the complaint is allowed as follows: We direct the 2nd opposite party to pay the price of the cloths ie. Rs. 2,200/- to the complainant and pay Rs. 750/- as cost of these proceedings. The order shall be complied with within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If not complied within one month the amount will carry interest @ 10% per annum from the date of this order till payment. Sri. K.N. Radhakrishnan, Member Sd/- Sri. Santhosh Kesavanath P., President Sd/- Smt. Bindhu M. Thomas, Member Sd/- APPENDIX Documents produced by complainant: Ext. A1: Bill Dtd: 2..9..2008 Ext. A2: The empty cover Ext. A3series Copy of complaint Dtd: 9..9..2008 Documents produced by 1st opposite party Ext. B1: Copy of goods issue sheet dt: 27..8..2008 Ext. B2: Copy of goods issue sheet nill date. By Order, Senior Superintendent
| | HONORABLE Bindhu M Thomas, Member | HONORABLE Santhosh Kesava Nath P, PRESIDENT | , | | 
