Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/37/2017

Venugopal - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Ajnabi Mithaai ghar - Opp.Party(s)

V.Balaji

31 Aug 2017

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  06.03.2017

                                                                Order pronounced on:  31.08.2017

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

        PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

              THIRU. M.UYIRROLI KANNAN B.B.A., B.L.,      MEMBER - I

 

THURSDAY THE 31^st DAY OF AUGUST 2017

 

C.C.NO.37/2017

 

 

Venugopal,

No.2, Rengaiah Street,

Choolai,

Chennai – 600 112.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

M/s. Ajnabi Mithaai Ghar,

Rep. by Mayur J.Sukhadia,

63, Elephant Gate Street,

Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079.

 

.....Opposite Party

Date of complaint                                 : 06.04.2017

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.V.Balaji, A.Sermaraj

Counsel for Opposite Party                      : Ex-parte (19.06.2017)

 

         

 

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the Complainant to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for deficiency in service and mental agony and also to order that the opposite party not to manufacture defective Badushah and to offer to the public with litigation expenses u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant has purchased ¼ kg of Special Badushah from the opposite party shop on 15.09.2016 at 6.48 p.m. He has consumed one sweet on the next day. Immediately he developed giddiness, vomiting and loose motion. On 18.09.2016 he lodged a complaint before the Consumer grievance Redressal day. Based on his complaint the Designated Officer also collected samples from the opposite party shop. Both the samples were sent for analysis to the King Institute, Guindy. They submitted report on 13.10.2016. In the said report the colour identified as Tartrazine, Sunset yellow. Further the opinion given in the report, as ‘the food is unsatisfactory to consume and substandard’ as per section 3(1)(zx) of FSS Act 2006.  Further the analysis report contained the material called Tartrazine. The WHO report states that

        “Tartrazine is a Sodium salt, in addition to the table salt and other sodium compounds present in the product it has salt more than the human body can handle. Besides, research has linked Tartrazine to asthma, skin rashes, hyperactivity (Particular in Children) and migraine”.

The opposite party has sold substandard food is against the purview of the CP Act. Hence the complainant filed this complaint to direct the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for mental agony and deficiency in service and also to order that the opposite party not to manufacture and offer Badusha to the public and with litigation expenses .

2. Though the Opposite Party received notice to appear before this Forum on 19.06.2017 hearing, he did not appear and he was set ex –parte.   

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

4. POINT NO :1 

          The complainant has purchased ¼ kg a special Badusha from the opposite party shop on 15.09.2016 on payment of consideration of Rs.120/- under Ex.A1. According to the complainant, he consumed one Badusha on the next day and he developed giddiness, vomiting and loose motion. On 18.09.2016 he lodged a complaint before the Consumer grievance Redressal day and for which complaint they issued Ex.A2 acknowledgement and based on his complaint the Designated Officer also collected samples from the complainant as well as from the opposite party  shop and sent it for analysis to the King Institute, Guindy. The King Institute furnished report dated 13.10.2016 to the  Designated Officer after examining the food samples and the said reports of the samples was sent to the Complainant  along with his letter dated 26.10.2016 under Ex.A4. The said report clearly states that the food samples  are unsatisfactory and substandard to consume and Tartrazine Sodium salt is  used in the food samples for colouring is a defective material and therefore the Badusha manufactured and sold to the complainant is a defective one and therefore the opposite party had committed deficiency in service. There is no contra evidence on behalf of the opposite party and hence the case of the Complainant  has to be accepted.

          5. In Ex.A4 at page 5 report of the samples lifted from the shop is available and at page 7  report of the samples lifted from the complainant is available. In both the reports dated 13.10.2016 the food analyst gave his opinion that the food is unsatisfactory and substandard  to consume as per section 3 (1)(xz) of FSS Act  2016. Further as per reports the colouring materials Tartrazine Sodium Salt is used.   The National Commission order relied on by the Complainant  counsel reported in I(2017) CPJ 461(NC) held in para 13 as follows:

          The learned counsel for the respondents also drew my attention to the WHO report filed by him wherein the following is mentioned in respect of the colour Tartrazine, which is found in the test reports:

          “Tartrazine is a sodium salt, in addition to the table salt and other sodium compounds present in the product it has salt more than the human body can handle. Besides, research has linked Tartrazine to asthma, skin rashes, hyperactivity (particular in children) and migraine.”

It is clear that as per the above observation of the Hon’ble National Commission the material Tartrazine will cause asthma, skin rashes hyperactivity and migraine to the human body. In the case in hand also the opposite party used Tartrazine in manufacturing the Badusha by them which would affect the health of the human body. Therefore the Complainant proved that as per the report furnished by the food analyst and also ratio laid down by the National Commission referred above that the opposite party manufactured sub-standard Badusha and sold it to the complainant and to the public and hence, it is held that the opposite party committed deficiency in service.

06. POINT NO:2

          As the opposite party  has manufactured sub-standard Badusha and sold it to the Complainant and such Badusha was consumed by the complainant which has affected his health, the Complainant suffered with mental agony is accepted. Further the opposite party also  manufacture sub-standard  eatable items particularly sweet and savories and selling the same to the public. If those defective foods sold by the opposite party were consumed by large number of public, their health would be affected. The Complainant is one person who comes out openly to   Redress his Grievance in proper manner. Therefore in such circumstances for the same it would be appropriate to direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation to the Complainant  would meet end of the justice.

          7. The opposite party sold the sub-standard Badusha is a hazardous one. Therefore in future the opposite party is prohibited to manufacture such hazardous Badusha and to sell it to the public. Further the opposite party is ordered to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

          In the result the Complaint is partly allowed. The Opposite Party is ordered not to manufacture non-hygienic Badusha and to sell to the public in future from the date of this order and also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty  thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony to the Complainant , besides a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only)  towards litigation expenses.

The above amount shall be paid to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the above said amount shall carry 9% interest till the date of payment.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 31^st   day of August 2017.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 15.09.2016                   Purchase Bill

Ex.A2 dated 18.09.2016                   Acknowledgement in Grievance Day

Ex.A3 dated 19.09.2016                   Letter of the Complainant

Ex.A4 dated 26.10.2016                   Letter of the Designated Officer with reports

Ex.A5 dated 14.11.2016                   Advocate Notice

Ex.A6 dated 30.11.2016                   Reply Notice

 

 

MEMBER – I                                                               PRESIDENT