Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/470/2015

Bansun - Complainant(s)

Versus

Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Hemlata Issar

08 Apr 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	CC/470/2015
Date  of  Institution	:	27/07/2015
Date   of   Decision	:	08/04/2016

 

 

 

 

 

Bansun son of Sh.Kishan, resident of House No.6295/C, Sector 56, Chandigarh.

 …………… Complainant.

Vs

 

[1]  Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Limited, Head Office Global Business Park, 4^th Floor, Tower-A, MG Road, Sikanderpur, Gurgaon, Haryana, through its Managing Director.

 

     Corporate Office:

 

     Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Limited, 3-B, DLF Corporate Park, S-Block, Qutab Enclave, Phase-3, Gurgaon, Haryana, through its Managing Director.

 

[2]  Pawan Confectioners, Booth No.20, Sector 40-C, Chandigarh, through its Proprietor.

 

……………  Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:   SMT.SURJEET KAUR             PRESIDING MEMBER

          SH.SURESH KUMAR SARDANA      MEMBER

 

For Complainant	:	Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate.
For OP Nos.1	:	Sh. Manvender Rathee, Advocate.
For OP No.2	:	Sh. Vishal Ahuja, Advocate.

 

PER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBER

 

 

          The facts germane to this Consumer Complaint are these. The Complainant purchased two bottles of soft drinks make ‘Mountain Dew’ from Opposite Party No.2 vide Invoice/Bill No. 4798 dated 03.07.2015 and paid Rs.75/- in cash (Annexure C-1). It has been alleged that when the Complainant consumed the soft drink, he immediately started feeling problems in his abdomen initially and after some minutes he started vomiting and suffered with stomach ache due to which he had to visit Govt. Multi-Specialty Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh, for treatment (Annexure C-2). Thereafter the Complainant has gone for check up to Govt. Medical College and Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh on 4.7.2015 (Annexure C-3). On 6.7.2015 the Complainant again visited Govt. Multi-Specialty Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh, for treatment (Annexure C-4). According to the Complainant due to the aforesaid act and conduct of the Opposite Parties, he has suffered mental and physical harassment, which proves deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part. Hence, this Complaint.  

 

2.      Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Parties seeking their version of the case.

 

3.      Opposite Party No.1 in its reply has pleaded that the bottle purchased by the Complainant does not belong to it and the Complainant has narrated a false and concocted story to misguide this Forum. It has been denied that the Complainant has purchased the alleged Cold drink (Mountain Dew) from the authorized dealer of Opposite Party No.1. It has also been denied that the Complainant has visited any of the Hospitals, as mentioned in the Complaint, and that due to consumption of soft drink he had felt problems in his abdomen and had stomach ache. All other allegations made in the Complaint have been denied and pleading that there was no deficiency in service on their part, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the complaint.

 

4.      Opposite Party No.2 in its reply has pleaded that the Complainant had purchased total 5 bottles which included 2 bottles of Mountain Dew, 1 bottle of Fanta, 1 bottle of Limca and 1 bottle of Coke. It has been denied that the Complainant purchased only 2 bottles of soft drink of Mountain dew. It has been asserted that the answering Opposite Party is only a Retailer of the products of Opposite Party No.1 and the product in question is manufactured by Opposite Party No.1. It has been further pleaded that no document has been placed on record to show that the Complainant suffered any problem due to consumption of the soft drink. The treatment undergone by the Complainant is in no manner connected with the consumption of the products purchased by the Complainant from the answering Opposite Party. All other allegations made in the Complaint have been denied and pleading that there was no deficiency in service on its part, Opposite Party No.5 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

5.      The Complainant also filed separate rejoinders to the respective written statements filed by the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2, wherein the averments as contained in the complaint have been reiterated and those as alleged in the written statements by the Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 have been controverted.

 

6.      Parties were permitted to place their respective evidence on record in support of their contentions.

 

7.      We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

 

8.      The dispute in the present case pertains to the bottle of mountain dew and the damage caused to the health of the Complainant after consuming the contents thereof. There is no dispute about the fact that the Complainant purchased bottles from Opposite Party No.2 on 3.7.2015 vide Cash Memo Annexure P-1 and after consuming the same he fell ill and got treatment for many days from Hospital. In support of his case, the Complainant has annexed medical record from Annexure P-2 to P-4, respectively. Opposite Party No.2 has admitted that he sold the bottles to the Complainant, but he has denied his liability as he is only retailer, and he has not manufactured the said soft drink. He has also contended that the product in question is manufactured by Opposite Party No.1. In this view of the matter, we have no hesitation to hold that Opposite Party No.2 is not liable in any manner as it is proved to sold bottles manufactured and bottled by the Opposite Party No.1. Opposite Party No.1 has stressed that the product is not through authorized sale point and it has also raised doubts about the consumption of contents by Complainant and the after effects. However, we are not impressed with this. Opposite Party No.2 has placed on record certain retail invoices of the soft drinks purchased during the period in question from M/s Eleven Excellence Merchandise (P) Ltd., Plot No.827, Makhan Majra Road, Chandigarh. This has not been demurred to by the Opposite Party No.1 and rather it subverted the issue by stating that it has lodged FIRs for spurious bottles of their product, but no such document with regard to the present bottle or the retailer has been placed on record. Moreover, from the medical evidence/record it is reasonably proved that the Complainant had fallen ill after consumption of mountain dew manufactured by Opposite Party No.1. In other words, there is concrete evidence to link the Opposite Party No.1 with the bottle in question.

 

9.      In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Party No.1 alone, and the same is allowed, qua it. The Opposite Party No.1 is directed to pay to the Complainant a sum of Rs.7500/- as compensation, within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which it would be liable to pay the same along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum since the date of filing of the present Complaint, till realization. 

 

10.      Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

08^th April, 2016                                        

 

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)                                                                                                      MEMBER