BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,  PANCHKULA

Sajjan Kumar S/o Sh. Krishan Chander, residence of House No.07, Village Subhash Nagar, P.O. H.M.T. Pinjore, District Panchkula-134101 Haryana.

                                                                           ….Complainant

Versus

1.     M/s Gupta Shopping Plaza, SCO-385, Sector-20, Panchkula,       Haryana.

2.     M/s Amulfed Dairy(A unit of GCMMF Ltd.) PO Bhat, Pin-     382428, District Gandhi Nagar, Gujarat, India

3.     M/s Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited,      PO Box-10, Amul Dairy Road, Anand-388001, Gujarat, India.

                                                                                  ….Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019

Before:              Sh. Satpal, President.

                        Dr. Sushma Garg, Member

                        Dr. Suman Singh, Member

For the Parties:   Complainant in person.

                        None for OP No.1.

                        Sh. Kapil Khanna, Advocate for the OPs No.2 & 3.

ORDER

(Satpal, President)

1.             The brief facts, as alleged in the present complaint, are, that on 28.05.2020, the complainant had purchased a packet of amul ghee of 1 kg from the opposite party no.1(hereinafter referred to as OP No.1) vide cash memo no.47140 amounting to Rs.550/- on 30.05.2020, which was the product of opposite parties no.2 (hereinafter to as OP  No.2) and OP No.3(hereinafter referred to as OP No.3; the said sealed packet of Amul Ghee was opened and consumed by the complainant and it was observed by him that some foul smell was coming from the same and smell was like that of an dead animal; the Ghee was suspected to be contaminated and harmful for human life; on 30.05.2020 at 11:17 PM, a complaint was lodged at the customer care of the manufacturer i.e. cutomercare@amul.coop.; on 01.06.2020, another complaint was lodged vide customer care no.18002583333, whereupon, the complainant was assured that the issue raised by him would be resolved within a week; On 01.06.2020, an email was received from the amul customer care team asking the complainant to send the batch number, manufacturing date/expiry by date and his residence pincode number, which were sent by him on the same day. On 02.06.2020, another email was received from amul customer care team informing him qua the complaint reference ID No.67982 assuring him the resolution of the issue within 7 days; On 06.06.2020, a call was received from mobile no.8595149457 belonging to amul customer care enquiring from the complainant about the details qua the defective product and the same were provided. On 14.06.2020, an another email was sent by the complainant to OPs No.2 & 3 seeking the resolution of the issue as raised by him qua contaminated Ghee; on 19.06.2020, the complainant again contacted the amul ghee customer care vide no. 18002583333 and mobile no.8595149457 but no response was received from the OPs No.2 & 3.  Due to the act and conduct of the OPs No.1 to 3, the complainant has suffered mental agony, harassment and financial loss; hence, the present complaint.

2.             Upon notice, the OP No.1 has appeared through its proprietor, namely, Sh.Anil Kumar, who simply stated on the letter head of Gupta Shopping Plaza i.e. OP No.1 that a sealed packet of one liter was purchased by the complainant from it. It is submitted that the OP No.1 is not the manufacturer of the product and the same was purchased by it from M/s Chawla Traders, Panchkula.  

                Upon notices, the OPs No.2 & 3 appeared through counsel and filed the written statement by raising preliminary objections that the complainant has not approached the Commission with clean hands and he has concealed vital and important facts. It is submitted that the OPs No.2 & 3 are giant manufacturers of milk related products in India, which are exported to aboard also and the OPs No.2 & 3 are also earning foreign currency. It is submitted that no complaint of any kind was received from any person qua the same batch number i.e. GAB105N3 as was purchased by the complainant. It is submitted that the Ghee of the same batch as was purchased by the complainant, was sold to almost 166 shops in and around Chandigarh, Mohali and Panchkula but no complaint of any kind was received from the shopkeepers qua emitting of any foul smell or the quality of the product.

                On merits, the allegations leveled by the complainant qua quality of the Ghee have been denied with the averments that if there had been any foul smell in the Ghee, the same ought to have come while the sealed packet was opened. It is submitted that as per complainant, the foul smell like of a dead animal was noticed by him on the next day, so, it was quiet obvious that the storage condition was not proper. It is submitted that the complainant has not explained the facts qua the presence of a dead object in the bottom of the packet, whereas the Ghee was transferred by him from the packet in utensils. It is submitted that the Food Analyst Haryana, the District Food Laboratory Karnal vide his report has not found any foul smell or dead animal in the Ghee and further, no contamination/ polluted substance was found. It is submitted that the card board packing i.e. sample of Ghee was found opened by the Food Analyst Haryana, the District Food Laboratory Karnal and thus, there were  possibilities of making adulteration of the Ghee by the complainant himself. It is further submitted that the laboratory report do not find the consumption of Ghee in question as harmful for human life. Further, no contaminated/substance was found vide said laboratory report. It is submitted that the Reichert Mineral Value should be minimum 28.0, which has been found 26.62 upon analysis but it depends upon the state in which the Ghee is manufactured and that minimum value of Reichert Mineral Value should be not less than 24 in the State of Gujarat, where the Ghee was actually manufactured according to food products standards and Food Additives Chart.

                Rest of the allegations as alleged by the complainant has been denied and it has been prayed that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs No.2 & 3 and as such, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.             To prove the case, the complainant has tendered affidavit as Annexure C-A along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-7 in evidence and closed the evidence by making a separate statement. On the other hand, the OP No.1 did not submit  its evidence in shape of affidavit along with documents etc. despite availing several opportunities; accordingly, its evidence was closed by the Commission on 11.11.2021. The learned counsel for the OPs no.2 & 3 has tendered affidavit as Annexure R-2/A alongwith documents Annexure R-2/1 to R-2/3 in evidence and closed the evidence.

4.             We have heard the complainant as well as the learned counsel for the OPs No.2 & 3 and gone through the entire record available on the file including written arguments filed by the complainant as well as OPs no.2 & 3, minutely and carefully.

5.             The complainant, during arguments, reiterated the averments as made in the complaint as also in his affidavit(Annexure C-A) and contended that the OPs No.2 & 3(manufacturer) had sold  a a sub-standard quality amul Ghee to the complainant through the seller/retailer i.e. OP No.1 on 28.05.2020. It was argued that the issue qua the sub standard quality of Amul Ghee was raised by him vide lodging the complaint on the customer care on 30.05.2020, 01.06.2020 & 14.06.2020 but the issue was not resolved. Concluding the arguments, the complainant contended that the Food Analyst Haryana District Food Laboratory Karnal vide his report dated 23.10.2020 has found the sample of amul ghee of sub standard quality and thus, the complaint is liable to be accepted by granting the relief as claimed for in the complaint.

6.             On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs No.2 & 3 have refuted the allegations as leveled by the complainant qua the sub standard quality of the Ghee by making several submissions, which are summarized as under:-

i.      That the batch no.GAB105N3 Ghee Tetra Pack Boxes of 1kg      packing as was purchased by the complainant, was sold to      almost 166 shops in and around Chandigarh and Mohali and 66       shops in and around Panchkula but no such complaint like         emitting of foul smell or substandard quality of the Ghee was     received from any of the shopkeepers or the consumers.

ii.      That the foul smell as per version of the complainant was         noticed by him on the next day of opening of the packet of the   amul Ghee and thus, the Ghee was not stored in proper condition.   It was argued that the complainant has failed to      explain as to what kind of object was seen by him in the packet   of Deshi Ghee, while transferring the Ghee from the packet in the utensils.

iii.     That the Food Analyst Haryana District Food Laboratory Karnal   vide his report dated 23.10.2020 has found no insect etc. in    the sample.

iv.     That no fault qua the product can be found on the parameter of         Reichert Meissl Value because the Amul Ghee was         manufactured in the State of Gujarat, where the minimum said     Reichert Meissl Value was required as 24.0. It was argued that   the Reichert Meissl Value was found 26.62, which was above   the minimum required value of 24.0, so, no defect can be    attributed qua the quality of the product in question.

                Concluding arguments, the learned counsel has prayed for dismissal of the complaint being frivolous, meritless and baseless.

7.             Pertinently, the sample of Amul Ghee in question was sent to Food Analyst Haryana, District Food Laboratory Karnal vide letter no.1292 dated 29.09.2020 in pursuance to order dated 16.09.2020 passed by the Commission. Initially, the sample was sent to Food Analyst Haryana, Sector -11 D, Chandigarh but the same was not accepted by the said Food Analyst Haryana, Sector -11 D, Chandigarh because the Commissioner Food & Drugs Administration Department vide order dated 02.06.2017 has  assigned the work of testing of samples belonging to District Panchkula to Food Analyst, Karnal. The report from Food Analyst Haryana, District Food Laboratory Karnal was received in the Commission Panchkula on 29.10.2020 and as per the said report dated 23.10.2020, the sample of amul ghee after its testing was found to be sub standard. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the report given by the Food Analyst Haryana District Food Laboratory, Karnal is reproduced as under:-

From

                    Food Analyst Haryana,

                   District Food Laboratory,

                   Karnal

To

                   The District Consumer

                   Disputes Redressal Commission

                   SCO No.208, Sector 14, Panchkula

Subject:-       Analysis of 1kg.packet/container of Ghee Make Amulin Consumer                  Complaint No.263 of 2020 titled as Sajjan Kumar vs. Gupta shopping                   Plaza etc.

                   In reference to your officer letter no.1292/DCDRC/PKL/ASSTT/2020, dated 29.9.2020, samples  was subjected to analysis and the analysis report is as under:-

                   Amul Pure Ghee Marked here as 638/October/2020.

1. Sample Description:- Sample of ghee in a open cardboard packing.
2. Physical Appearance:- Samples is free from insects, infestation, fungus and moulds growth. It become is clear on heating.
3.  

And am of the opinion that :- Sample gives 26.62 Reichert Meissl Value  against  minimum prescribed  limit of 28.0 as laid down for ghee under the provisions of Regulation 2.1.8 of chapter 2 of FSS Act (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011.

Hence the sample is Sub Standard.

8.             Since the sample of the Amul Ghee as purchased by the complainant has been found to be of sub standard quality, no weight is liable to be given to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the OPs No.2 & 3. The OPs No.2 & 3(manufacturer) has justified the Reichert Meissl Value as 26.62 taking the plea that the minimum Reichert Meissl Value as required is 24.0 in the State of Gujarat, wherein the amul Ghee i.e. the product in question was manufactured. The said plea is rejected having no weight in it because as per Annexure R-2/3, the minimum Reichert Meissl Value as required for the consumption of Amul Ghee in the State of Haryana other than cotton tract areas is 28.0. Pertinently, the amul Ghee in question was sold in District Panchkula, which does not fall under the cotton tract areas, so, the minimum Reichert Meissl Value- as required is 28.0.

9.             Further, the plea taken by the OPs No.2 & 3 (manufacturer) that no complaint from any other shopkeepers/ consumers qua the same batch as was purchased by the complainant is not tenable because the batch no.BAB105N of the Amul Ghee was purchased by the complainant whereas the OPs No.2 & 3 speaks about the batch no.GAB105N03 vide Annexure R-2/2. Further, in the light of clear, and specific findings of the Food Analyst Haryana, District Food Laboratory Karnal qua the quality of the Amul Ghee in question as sub standard, no merits are found in the contentions and submissions made by the OPs No.2 & 3.

10.            Moreover, the issue qua the quality of the amul ghee in question was promptly raised by the complainant by lodging the complaint on the customer care of Ops No.2 & 3 on 30.05.2020, whereupon the batch number etc. were asked from him(the complainant), which were immediately, provided by him to the customer care team of the OPs No.2 & 3 but the OPs No.2 & 3 did not prefer to get the sample of the same batch number tested from any authorized laboratory. Even after the receipt of several emails and complaints from the complainant, the OPs had preferred not to get the sample of the same batch tested from any laboratory. Furthermore, no objection qua the findings recorded by Food Analyst Haryana, District Food Laboratory Karnal vide his report dated 23.10.2020 has been filed.

11.            From the aforesaid discussion, we have reached at irresistible conclusion that the OPs No.2 & 3 were deficient and adopted unfair trade practice while selling the packet of amul ghee in question to the complainant through the seller(OP No.1), for which, they are liable, jointly and severally, to compensate  to him.

12.            Now, coming to the liability of OP No.1, it is found that Sh. Anil Kumar proprietor of OP No.1 had appeared on 01.12.2020, who simply submitted on the letter head of OP No.1 that the amul ghee in question was purchased by the complainant on 28.05.2020 from OP No.1 and that the OP No.2 was not the manufacturer of the product i.e. amul ghee and that the OP No.1 had purchased the amul ghee in question from M/s Chawla Traders Panchkula. Pertinently, the OP No.1 has not controverted or rebutted the contentions of the complainant as made in the complaint. The OP No.1 had appeared before the Commission on 22.10.2020 & 01.12.2020 and thereafter, neither OP No.1 nor anyone authorized by him ever appeared before the Commission. Even no documentary evidence in the shape of affidavits etc.  have been placed on record by OP No.1; hence, the OP No.1 cannot escape from its liability to compensate the complainant qua deficiency on its part.

13.            In relief, the complainant has claimed the refund of the purchase price of Rs.505/- qua the packet of amul ghee in question. Further, he has claimed the compensation of Rs.50,000/- on account of putting the human life at risk. Further, the complainant has prayed for imposition of punitive damages upon the OPs on account of their indulgence into unfair trade practice. The litigation charges in filing the present complaint has also been claimed.

14.            As a sequel to above discussion, we partly allow the present complaint with the following directions:-

1. The OP No.1 is directed to refund a sum of Rs.505/- to the complainant alongwith interest @9% per annum (simple interest) w.e.f. 28.05.2020 i.e. the date of purchase of amul ghee in question till its actual realization.
2. The OP No.1 is also directed to pay a compensation of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment. Further, the OP No.2 is also burdened with the compensation of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him.
3. The OP No.1 is further directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- as litigation charges.
4. The OPs No.2 & 3 are directed, jointly and severally, to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- along with interest @9% P.A. w.e.f. 07.10.2020, to the complainant, which was charged by the Food Analyst Haryana, the District Food Laboratory Karnal as testing charges vide receipt dated 07.10.2020.
5. The OP No.2 & 3 are further burdened, jointly and severally, with the punitive damages amounting to Rs.5,00,000/-(Rs. Five Lakhs only) on account of selling the sub standard quality of edible items i.e. the amul ghee in question, which  shall be deposited by them(OPs No.2 & 3) in the account of the Poor Patient Welfare Fund (PPWF) through the Director, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh by way of DD/pay order and accordingly,  the OPs No.2 & 3 are is directed to send the DD/Pay order amounting to Rs.5,00,000/-(Rs.Five Lakhs only) in favour of the Director, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh for deposit of the same in the account of Poor Patient Welfare Fund(PPWF).
6. The OP No.1 as well as OPs No.2 & 3 are further directed to refrain from selling the sub standard quality of products to the consumers in future.

15.            Before parting with this order, we deem it proper to direct the Assistant Registrar of the Commission to send the copy of this order to the following:-

a.     The Commissioner, Food and Drugs Administration, Haryana,     SCO No.94, Sector-5, Panchkula with the directions to take adequate and necessary steps by directing the concerned Food          inspector/ District Health Officer to conduct frequent checking    of the edible items as sold by the shopkeepers, restaurant and      sweet shops etc. regarding quality, quantity, validity/expiry of         food products in order to prevent the practice of selling of    edible items of sub standard quality, underweight product and    expired products etc. to the consumers.

b.     The Director General Health, Sector-6, Panchkula with the         directions to take appropriate action against such shopkeepers   /owners/proprietor of restaurant etc. who sells the sub               standard/ adulterated/contaminated, edible items, underweight         product and expired products to the consumers. 

c.      The  Deputy Commissioner, Panchkula to take similar action     as per directions issued above at serial no. a & b of this para.

d.     The District Public Relation Officer, Panchkula for making wide   publicity of the directions contained in this order by getting the        same published in several leading newspapers circulating in the         locality so as to create awareness among the consumers and a         sense of deterrence among the sellers/service providers.

e.     Sh. N.C.Rana, Consumers Association, Panchkula, Booth No.      68-69, Sector-10, Panchkula for making awareness among         the consumers qua the directions issued in the present order.

16.            The Assistant Registrar of this Commission is directed to seek the action taken report from all the above qua the compliance of the directions as issued vide present order after a period of three months and place the same before the Commission.

17.            The OPs No.1 to 3 shall comply with the directions/order within a period of 45 days from the date of communication of copy of this order to OPs No.1 to 3 failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to approach this Commission for initiation of proceedings under Section 71/72 of CP Act, against the OPs No.1 to 3. A copy of this order shall be forwarded, free of cost, to the parties to the complaint and file be consigned to record room after due compliance. 

Announced on:16.09.2024

        Dr.Suman Singh          Dr.Sushma Garg            Satpal

             Member                      Member                         President

Note: Each and every page of this order has been duly signed by me.

                                                Satpal

                                          President