Mohinder Singh filed a consumer case on 03 Dec 2018 against M/s Darshan Food in the Ludhiana Consumer Court. The case no is CC/18/68 and the judgment uploaded on 06 Dec 2018.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.
Consumer Complaint No. : 68 of 29.01.2018
Date of Decision : 03.12.2018
Mohinder Singh aged about 60 years son of Sh.Gurcharan Singh r/o H.No.11704, Street No.2, S.A.S.Nagar, Ludhiana.
….. Complainant
Versus
1.M/s. Darshan Foods, Boothgarh Road, village Rattanheri, Khanna, through its Prop/Partner/M.D/Authorized Representative.
2.M/s Jimmy Confectionary, Vishvakarma Colony, Near Dholewal, Ludhiana, through its Prop.Sh.Guneet Singh.
…Opposite parties
(Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)
QUORUM:
SH.G.K.DHIR, PRESIDENT
SH.VINOD GULATI, MEMBER
COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:
For complainant : Sh.Balraj Singh, Advocate
For Ops : Ex-parte
PER G.K DHIR, PRESIDENT
1. Complainant along with his family is a consumer in routine of the products manufactured by OP1 and for that purpose, he had been purchasing the products from OP2. Packet of snacks namely (Bhoj Ram Natto Lite) was purchased by the complainant from OP2 on 10.1.2018. That product manufactured by OP1 in September 2017. Before opening the packet manufactured by OP1, complainant was surprised to see that said packet was filled with air and is totally empty. That packet is produced in the Forum. On account of this negligence on the part of Ops, complainant claims to have suffered and that is why, this complaint for directing Ops to pay compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.1 lac.
2. Ops are ex-parte in this case.
3. Complainant in ex-parte evidence tendered his affidavit Ex.CA along with documents Ex.C1 and Ex.C2 and thereafter, closed the evidence.
4. Written arguments not submitted, but oral arguments alone addressed by counsel for complainant and those were heard. Records gone through minutely.
5. Product purchased by complainant from OP2 is produced as Ex.C2. The sealed envelope of this product known as “Bhoj Ram Natto Lite” (produced as Ex.C2) shows that this packet (envelop) is filled with air and no consumable item contained in it. This product manufactured in September 2017 by OP1 is a fact borne from the empty packet of the product. MRP of the product is Rs.5/-. Sale of empty packet by OP2 to complainant is an unfair trade practice because whosoever purchases an eatable packet he does so by assuming that eatable are contained in the packet. As empty packet supplied by OP1 to OP2 was sold to complinant and as such, certainly Ops adopted unfair trade practice by selling an empty packet to the complainant. In view of this major deficiency in service on the part of Ops, complainant entitled for refund of entire price of Rs.5/- of the product along with interest @6% per annum from the date of purchase namely 10.1.2018 till payment. As empty packet handed over to complainant and as such, complainant suffered mental agony and harassment and was dragged in this litigation. So, composite amount of Rs.5000/- needs be allowed on account of compensation and litigation expenses.
6. Therefore, as a sequel of the above discussion, complaint allowed exparte with directions to Ops to refund the price of Rs.5/- along with interest @6% per annum thereon w.e.f. 10.01.2018 till payment. Composite amount of Rs.5000/-(Rupees Five Thousand Only) allowed on account of compensation and litigation expenses. Payment of this amount of Rs.5000/- be made by Ops to complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copies of order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules.
7. File be indexed and consigned to record room.
(Vinod Gulati) (G.K.Dhir)
Member President
Announced in Open Forum
Dated:03.12.2018
Gurpreet Sharma.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.