Haryana

Kaithal

168/21

Dr.Raj Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Medlife International Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Sushil Bindlish

13 Apr 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAITHAL.

                                                 Complaint Case No.168/2021.

                                                 Date of institution: 19.07.2021.

                                                 Date of decision:13.04.2023.

Dr. Raj Kumar Garg aged about 60 years S/o Sh. Kapoor Chand C/o Raj Nursing Home, Park Road Kaithal, District Kaithal.

                                                                        …Complainant.

                        Versus

1. Medlife International Private Limited Enezyme JMC Business Park 17/1 near Hosur Road Central Silk Board Colony Junction, Bengaluru, Karnataka-56068.
2. Be Healthy Pharmacy Udyog Enezyme JMC Business Park 17/1 near Hosur Road Central Solk Board Colony Junction Banglore Karnatka, 56088.

….Respondents.

Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

CORAM:     SMT. NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT.

                SMT. SUMAN RANA, MEMBER.

                SH. SUNIL MOHAN TRIKHA, MEMBER.

 

Present:     Sh. R.C.Goel, Advocate, for the complainant.   

                Respondents exparte.

               

ORDER

NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT

        Dr. Raj Kumar-Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the respondents.  

                    In nutshell, the facts of present case are that the complainant is a reputed doctor and he had placed the order for the purchase of 90 capsules (9 strips of 10 capsules each) of the medicine COLASMART-A CAPSULES for his own use for a valuable consideration of Rs.2506.28 paise vide invoice No.OR3729HUB-003A dt. 01.03.2021.  It is alleged that the complainant received the above-said medicine on 03.03.2021 and on opening the parcel, it was found that the said parcel contained 8 strips of 10 capsules each only i.e. 80 capsules, whereas the complainant had placed the order for 90 capsules.  The complainant raised the complaint against the said short supply on 03.03.2021 itself by making a call on the customer care number of the respondent No.1 and also send e-mail dt. 13.03.2021 which was followed by the e-mail dt. 20.03.2021 and 30.03.2021 but the grievances of complainant were not redressed by the respondents.  So, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of respondents and prayed for acceptance of complaint.   

2.             Upon notice, the respondents did not appear and opted to proceed against exparte vide order dt.22.03.2022 of this commission.

3.             The complainant tendered in evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure-CW2 to Annexure-CW10 and thereafter, closed the evidence.     

4.             We have heard the learned counsel for complainant and perused the case file carefully and minutely.

5.             Ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant is a reputed doctor and he had placed the order for the purchase of 90 capsules (9 strips of 10 capsules each) of the medicine COLASMART-A CAPSULES for his own use for a valuable consideration of Rs.2506.28 paise vide invoice No.OR3729HUB-003A dt. 01.03.2021.  It is alleged that the complainant received the above-said medicine on 03.03.2021 and on opening the parcel, it was found that the said parcel contained 8 strips of 10 capsules each only i.e. 80 capsules, whereas the complainant had placed the order for 90 capsules.  The complainant raised the complaint against the said short supply on 03.03.2021 itself by making a call on the customer care number of the respondent No.1 and also send e-mail dt. 13.03.2021 as per Annexure-CW3 which was followed by the e-mail dt. 20.03.2021 and 30.03.2021 but the grievances of complainant were not redressed by the respondents. 

6.             The complainant has supported his versions by way of filing affidavit Ex.CW1 and documents Annexure-CW2 to Annexure-CW10.  Ex.CW3 is e-mail dt. 13.03.2021 written by complainant to OPs vide which it is clear that the complainant has raised objection regarding mismatch of capsules ordered by the complainant.  Annexure-C4 is the e-mail dt. 15.03.2021 written by the Ops to the complainant vide which they apologies for the inconvenience caused to the complainant.  The complainant has testified all the contents in the affidavit so set out by him in the complaint.  Whereas, respondents are also proceeded against exparte as they did not appear in the court even one time.  So, the evidence produced by the complainant goes unrebutted and unchallenged against the Ops. 

7.             Thus, as a sequel of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted with cost.  The respondents jointly and severally are directed to refund the cost of 10 capsules to the complainant and further to pay Rs.5,000/- in lump sum as compensation on account of physical harassment and mental agony as-well-as litigation charges to the complainant within 45 days from today. 

8.             In default of compliance of this order, proceedings against respondents-OPs shall be initiated under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as non-compliance of court order shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees, but which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court:

Dt.:13.04.2023.

                                                        (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                        President.

 

(Sunil Mohan Trikha),           (Suman Rana),          

Member.                            Member.

 

Typed by: Sanjay Kumar, S.G.