Delhi

New Delhi

OC/690/2004

Ishwar Kumar Malhotra - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

12 Dec 2018

ORDER

 

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC.690/2004                                 Dated:

In the matter of:

                Sh. Ishwar Kumar Malhotra, Advocate,

                S/o Late Sh. Chet Ram Malhotra,

                R/o B-1, Park View Apartment,

                 Inder Enclave, Paschim Vihar,

                 Delhi-110087.

           ……..COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

1. M/s Hindustan Coca Cola,

Beverages Pvt. Ltd.,

           (Formerly kinown as Hindustan Coca Cola

           Bottling North-West Pvt. Ltd.,

           Having its registered office at 13,

           Abul Fazal Road, Bengali Market,

           New Delhi

           And also at Enkay Towers, Vaniya Nikunj,

           Udyog Vihar Ph.V, Gurgaon-122106(Haryana).

 

2.     Sh. Ashok Kalra, Proprietor,

Shiv General Store,

Miyanwali Nagar,

Near Pragarhi, Paschim Vihar,

New Delhi.

Opposite Parties.

 

ARUN KUMAR ARYA, PRESIDENT

 

ORDER

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.Ps under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that in the month of June, 2002, the complainant purchased four coca cola 300 ml bottles a soft drinks produced, manufactured and bottled by OP-1.  It is alleged that the said drinks were purchased by the complainant from OP-2 and while he was going to serve the alleged soft drink to his guest, he noticed that a foreign object i.e. Tobacco product(ShikHar Gutkha) was found in one of the sealed bottle. The said product is of OP-1 “Coca Cola”.     It is alleged that the complainant immediately contacted OP-1, one marketing personnel  of OP-1’s Co. visited the house of the complainant, who inspected and verified the alleged bottle and also confirmed the fact that the alleged soft drink bottle contains a foreign object i.e. Tobacco product(ShikHar Gutkha).  He further confirmed that the said mistake might have occurred at the time of filling up the bottle in the plant or due to the negligent act of any employee of OP-1 Co. at the relevant time. He also apologized to the complainant for the foreign object found in the bottle and further requested the complainant not to initiate any legal proceedings against them or publicise the matter in the press which definitely would adversely affect the goodwill and reputation of his company  in the eyes of public at large  and also undertake that  the complainant  would be adequately compensate for the same. Later on OP-1 flatly refused to compensate the complainant. It is further alleged that two legal notices were also sent to OP-1  by the complainant but neither any response nor any compensation received  from OP-1,  hence this complaint.

2.     Complaint has been contested by both the OPs.  In its reply OP-1   has pleaded that the present complaint is not maintainable.  It has been pleaded that soft drinks are manufactured by OP-1 in modern sophisticated plants which maintain a very high standard of hygiene and cleanliness.  The manufacturing process involves strict quality checks at various stages of manufacture, ruling out any possibility of any pieces or any foreign matter in the bottled product as alleged by the complainant.  It is further pleaded that one Mr. Sonal Kumar, working as Head, Quality Assurance Department, Delhi Operations with the OP-1 appeared before this Forum on 16.12.2004 and inspected the alleged bottle of coca cola.  Mr. Sonal Kumar further confirmed that the bottle of coca-cola containing some black liquid is not the one manufactured by the company Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. i.e. OP-1, he further stated that the alleged bottle does not contain the date and code.  It is alleged that the relief claim by the complainant in the complaint is not maintainable, as the OP-1 has no liability whatsoever to pay any sum to the complainant be way of compensation.  The compensation can be granted to make good the loss or damage suffered and in this case there is no averment or proof that the complainant having suffered any loss or damage as a direct consequence of the alleged sale/purchase of soft drinks in question. It is further alleged that the complainant has not led any evidence in support of his claim for compensation as claimed in the complaint, hence, prayed for dismissal of  the complaint.

3.     OP-2 has pleaded that alleged soft drink was manufactured and bottled by OP-1 and the same was supplied to OP-2 for further supplies to various customers.  It has been pleaded that the complainant came to OP-2 and showed one sealed bottle containing a pack of Tobacco product which was visible as Shikhar Gutkha and he informed the complainant that  he has nothing  to do with the same as he received the said supply from OP-1, and further asked the complainant to contact OP-1 directly in this regard.  It is further alleged that the complainant has not claimed any relief against OP-2, hence, OP-2 is not liable to pay any claim and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4.     Both the parties have filed their evidence by way of affidavit.  

5.     We have heard argument advance at the Bar and have perused the record.

6.     It is argued on behalf of OP-1 that the complainant has purchased the alleged bottle in question from OP-2, the contaminated bottle in question does not have any batch no. and date of manufacturing on it, hence, it is the OP-2 who was aware about the source from where he purchased the contaminated bottle, hence, OP-2 is liable for deficiency in services, if any.  It is further argued that OP-1 is not liable for the act of OP-2.  It is argued on behalf of OP-1 that soft drinks are manufactured by OP-1 in modern sophisticated plants which maintain a very high standard of hygiene and cleanliness.  The manufacturing process involves strict quality checks at various stages of manufacture, ruling out any possibility of any pieces or any foreign matter in the bottled product as alleged by the complainant.  It is further argued that the complainant has not suffered any loss or damage as a direct consequence of the alleged sale/purchase of soft drinks in question and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.

7.     We are not in agreement with the contention of the counsel for OP-1.  We have seen the contaminated bottle of soft drink make coca cola produced before us. The bottle is sealed one, hence, we do not feel it proper to refer the bottle for analysis to appropriate laboratory at this stage.     Moreover, through our naked eyes we can easily see that the alleged bottle in question containing foreign object i.e. Tobacco product(ShikHar Gutkha).  The complainant has asked for compensation of Rs.4,05,000/- along with interest of 18%. It is not the case where the complainant has opened the bottled and drank some portion out of it which could have been contaminated and in consequences of the same the complainant suffered any loss or damages.

8.     Under these circumstances, nothing can be allowed to him on the account of mental agony or anguish faced by him.  However, he is entitled for refund of Rs.10/- along with interest as well as for litigation cost.

9.     In view of the above, we are the considered opinion that since complainant has not claimed any relief against OP-2, OP-2 is discharged from any liability arising out of the present complaint.  We hold OP-1 guilty deficiency in services on account of manufacturing and supplying the contaminated soft drink water to the complainant and direct it as under:

i)      Refund to the complainant a sum of Rs.10/- i.e. the cost of the alleged bottle along with interest @ 9% from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 25.5.2004 till its realization.

ii)      Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.25,000/- as litigation cost.

 

The order shall be complied  within 30 days of the receipt of the order. If the said amount is not paid by the OP within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, the same shall be recovered by the complainant along with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order till recovery of the said amount. This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy each of this order be sent to both parties free of cost by post. File be consigned to Record Room.

 

Announced in open Forum on  12/12/2018.

 

 

                                                (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

          PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                            (H M VYAS)

                    MEMBER                                                   MEMBER