By Sri. MOHANDASAN.K, PRESIDENT
1.Complaint in short is as follows–
The complainant is a sugar patient and he regularly purchased medicine from the opposite party shop. The complainant purchased certain medicine on 04/5/2020 which includes Glimepiride, voglibose & metformin (ER) tablets. But that medicine was expired on 2019 December. The complainant had the medicine for 10 days and thereafter it was found the medicine was expired one. The complainant immediately approached the opposite party shop, but at that time he was not in possession of the medical bill and then the opposite party said that the complainant might have purchased the medicine from somewhere else or it might have purchased long before. The opposite party said the same in presence of other consumers in a defamatory tone. The opposite party did not care to examine the complaint while the date of purchase revealed to the opposite party, but insulted the complainant stating the complainant is telling lie. The complainant thereafter held a thorough search for the medical bill and it was found out. Then again the complainant approached the opposite party, but the reply was a threat to do anything whatever the complainant pleases. Hence the complainant approached this Commission seeking refund of the cost of the medicine Rs. 270/-and compensation of Rs. 50,000/- along with cost of Rs. 25000/-.
2. On admission of the complaint notice was issued to the opposite party and the opposite party entered appearance and filed version.
3. The opposite party filed version denying the entire averments, allegations and contenting the complaint is not maintainable. The opposite party contented that the approach of the complainant is to defame the opposite party and nothing more. The complainant had approached opposite party to get assistance for installing a shop at Mampad of the Jan Aushadi Kendra and for which the opposite party could not provide assistance and on that reason the complainant filed this false complaint. The opposite party admitted that the complainant had purchased medicine from the opposite party shop on 04/05/2020 and as per bill No. 0019782, complainant had purchased Glimepiride-2, Voglibose, Metformin (ER) tablets. But the statement of the complainant that the opposite party issued medicine which had expired in 2019 December is not correct. There was no such an incident and no medicine of expired was issued from the shop of opposite party.
4. The opposite party submitted that as per the bill dated 04/05/2020, 60 Tablets worth Rs. 45/- per Tablet was issued. Jan Aushadi Kendra issuing medicine to the customers as per MRP rate. The Ext.A1 bill reveals MRP rate. The same MRP rate will be printed over the medicine strip. But the cost printed on the medicine strip produced before the Consumer Commission is Rs.55.56/-. The produced bill shows the cost as Rs. 270/- and the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant produced the medicine is not the medicine purchased as per the produced Ext.A1 bill. The opposite party submitted that the complainant produced expired medicine collected from somewhere else as part of the enmity of the complainant towards the opposite party. The attempt of the complainant is to mislead the consumer commission. The opposite party denied that the complainant used the medicine for 10 days and thereafter date of expiry noted by the complainant. The opposite party also denied the contention of the complainant that the complainant approached the opposite party shop, made to the knowledge of the opposite party about expiry of medicine, due to want of medical bill at the time of approaching opposite party, the opposite party responded that the medicine might have purchased by the complainant somewhere else or it may be purchased long ago, the opposite party insulted the complainant before the other consumers. The opposite party submitted that no such incident was took place and there is no explanation from the side of complainant from where the bill was obtained to the complainant which was stated as lost earlier. The opposite party also denied the contention of the complainant that though the complainant stated the date of purchase of medicine, but the opposite party did not care to realise the true facts and blamed the complainant. The bill was obtained on thorough searching, again approached the opposite party, then the opposite party said that the complainant can do whatever he pleases etc.
The opposite party submitted that there was no such incident of approaching the opposite party by the complainant and the conversation as alleged. Moreover, opposite party submitted that each and every day all the medicines of the shop is being manually verified and also checking the expiry medicine for destroying the same and a staff namely Syed Muhammad has been appointed in the shop for the very purpose and he is still working in the shop.
5. The opposite party submitted that the shop is working at Makkaraparamba, having sufficient business and the people are getting low-cost medicines through Pradhan Mantri Bharatiya Jan Aushadi Kendra. The complainant seeing the business in the shop thought of starting a medical shop at Mampad and for that the opposite party could not help the complainant. The opposite party told complainant the Central Government will allow the shop only as per norms. The complainant misunderstood the opposite party and tried to make various inconvenience to the opposite party. This complaint is part of the attempt of the complainant to make hardships and inconvenience to the opposite party. The opposite party is doing business honestly without any malpractice. The attempt of the complainant is to defame the opposite party. The daughter of the complainant is a doctor and some local medical shop owners are also behind the complaint- the opposite party submitted. The opposite party contented that the complainant is not entitled for the refund of the cost of the medicine Rs. 270/-, compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and cost of Rs. 25000/-.
6. Complainant and opposite party filed affidavit. The complainant filed documents also. The opposite party did not produce any documents. Documents on the side of complainant marked as Ext.A1 & A2. Ext. A1 is medical bill No.0019782 dated 04/05/2020, Ext. A2 is Four strips of Glimepiride, Voglibose & Metformin (ER) Tablets with batch No. PWZF102, MFD.07/18, EXP.12/2019 and MRP.Rs. 55.56/- per ten tablets.
7. Heard complainant and opposite party, perused affidavit and documents. The following points arise for consideration.
- Whether there was deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the side of opposite party?
- Relief and cost.
8. Point No.1 & 2
The case of the complaint is that on 04/05/2020, he purchased Gilmepiride, Voglibose & Metformin (ER) tablets as per bill No.0019782 from the opposite party. But after consumption of medicine for 10 days it was found that the medicine issued to him was out dated. The opposite party admitted that the complainant purchased medicine from the shop on 04/05/2020 as per bill No.0019782. But denied the issuance of outdated medicine. The contention of the opposite party is that the opposite party issuing medicines to the customers as per MRP rate. The bill issued by the opposite party will reveal the MRP price. According to opposite party the MRP rate printed over the bill as well as MRP rate printed over the medicine strips will be same. In this complaint as per Ext.A2 the MRP rate printed reveals as Rs.55.56/-.But the Ext. A1 bill issued by the opposite party reveals the cost as Rs. 270/- for 60 tablets. So, the contention is that the medicine strips produced by complainant is not the medicine sold to the complainant as per Ext. A1 medical bill. The opposite party further contented that, either the complainant had purchased the medicines from any other shop or he had purchased the medicines long ago. More over the opposite party contented that the complainant approached the opposite party for installing a medical shop at Mampad for which he could not help the complainant and so there is a strained relationship with the complainant and opposite party. Due to the above reason complainant was trying to make disturbance and inconvenience to the opposite party.
9. It is to be noted that the opposite party had admitted the issuance of Ext. A1 document. As per the document the complainant had purchased the medicine as contented in the complaint. Ext.A1 Bill, there are specific columns to write down the name of the Patient, Doctors name, Batch Number, Expiry date, MRP rate and discount also. All the columns relevant are blank. If the opposite party had made entry in the columns of batch No, expiry date and MRP date, the question of dispute as contented by the opposite party does not had arisen. Since the opposite party admitted issuance of the Ext.A1 medical bill, he cannot content the medicine produced by the complainant as Ext.A2 is not issued by the opposite party. If the opposite party had maintained the correct and proper records for issuance of medicines, he could have rightly produced the records before the Commission. In short, the opposite party issued Ext.A2 medicine to the complainant without recording batch number, MRP and expiry date. The perusal of averments in Ext. A1 itself proved the nature of unfair trade practice on the side of opposite party. Hence, we find that there is unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.
10. The opposite party has got a contention that the complainant approached him seeking assistance for installing a medical shop at Mampad and the opposite party could not assist the complainant for the same and that reason the complainant was in bad terms with the opposite party. The complainant filed this complaint at the instance of certain local medical shops also. But the opposite party could not produce any piece of evidence in support of his contention.
11. The complainant herein submitted that, he approached the opposite party first time without the medical bill, but the response was negative. Even though he reported the date of purchase of medicine the opposite party ignored the same. It can be seen that if the opposite party was fair enough to see redressal of the grievance, he could have found out exact medicine issued to the complainant including batch Number and MRP rate. The complainant further submitted that, he made thorough search for the medical bill and found out the same and again approached the opposite party with the complaint. At that time the opposite party challenged the complainant to do whatever complainant pleases. The complainant submitted before the Commission at the time of hearing that he is an aged person and taking medicine regularly and that regularly purchasing medicine from the opposite party, but the opposite party insulted and ignored his genuine grievance. The submission of complainant was that if the opposite party had responded to his grievance properly, he may not have approached this Commission. We find the submission of the complainant as worth full and genuine.
12. It can be seen that the opposite party is running Pradhan Mantri Bharatiya Jan Aushadi Kendra, which is introduced by the Central Government to provide life save medicines in low cost to the needy people. It is expected to function the opposite party as designed by the authority. But in this complaint, we find that there is unfair and deficient mode of practice and service from the part of opposite party. Hence, we find the grievance of the complainant as genuine and to be redressed.
13. The claim of complainant is to refund the cost of medicine as per Ext.A1 and also prays for compensation and cost. Considering the entire nature of the complaint we allow this complaint as follows: -
- The opposite party is directed to refund the cost of medicine Rs.270/- (Rupees Two hundred and seventy only) as per Ext. A1 to the complainant.
- The opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees Twenty thousand only) as compensation to the complainant on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and thereby caused hardships, inconvenience and mental agony to the complainant.
- The opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 5000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of the proceedings.
The opposite party shall comply this order within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which, the above said entire amount will carry interest at the rate 12% per annum from the date of filing this complaint to till realisation.
