DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No.253 of 5.7.2017

                                      Decided on: 13.8.2021

Rajinder Singh S/o Jaswant Singh, resident of 7-B, Majithia Enclave, Patiala 147005.                                                                    …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. Shubham Sweets Ablowal, Near Sigligar Basti of Nabha Road, Patiala.
2. The Executive Consumer Care cell Britania Industries Limited, prestige Shantiniketon Tower,  whitlefiled Bangalore, 560048, Karnataka.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                                      Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

                                      Sh.Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member

ARGUED BY              

                                      Sh.Rajinder Singh, complainant in person.

                                      Opposite party No.1 ex-parte.

                                      Sh.Pankaj Verma, counsel for OP No.2.                      

 ORDER

                                      JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT

1. This is the complaint filed by Rajinder Singh (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against Shubham Sweets and another (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s).
2. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant bought 5 packets of Britania good day buttery scoth biscuits alongwith other products. It is averred that the packets of biscuits were stated to be have 26% extra as printed on the packets. It is averred that there is one packet of different batch number having lesser number of biscuits i.e. lesser in weight. The particulars of the packet are MRP Rs.10/-, net weight 66 grams + 17 grams extra =83 grams, PKD 24.1.2017, Lot No.B0117K5 and machine code 35-B. It is further averred that no care is being taken to maintain the correct working of machines. There is thus deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by imposing fine upon the OPs.
3. Notice of the complaint was duly given to the OPs. OP No.2 appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply while none appeared on behalf of OP No.1 and accordingly OP No.1 was proceeded against exparte.
4. In the written reply filed by OP No.2 preliminary objections have been raised having denied all the allegations made by the complainant.
5. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant is habitual of filing false and frivolous complaints against the companies. It is admitted that the OP no.2 is the manufacturer of the Britania Good Day Buttery Scotch biscuits. It is pleaded that the bill produced by the complainant cannot be taken into consideration and relied upon as it does not bear the address of the retailer nor does it bear the TIN No. etc. of the retailer. The retailer is hand in glove with the complainant and has issued a false bill just in order to take advantage of OP No.2. It is further submitted that there are a lot of spurious/look alike products available in the market. It is further submitted that OP No.2 have installed and follow stringent quality control measures which help them in eliminating any type of defective or underweight product. There is no deficiency in service of unfair trade practice on the part of OP No.2. After denying all other averments made in the complaint the OP No.2 has prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
6. In support of the complaint, the complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit, Ex.CA alongwith document Ex.C1 and closed the evidence.
7. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for OP No.2 has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of Mohd. Mahsin Beg. Manager Legal with Britania Industries Ltd. and closed the evidence.
8. We have heard the complainant, the ld. counsel for OP No.2 and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
9. The complainant present in person has argued that he purchased five packets of Britania Good day from Shubham sweets, Nabha Road, Patiala. He further argued that all the packets of biscuits are stated to have 26% extra but the one packet was weighing 60 gram only and is less by 20%.The complainant further argued that he be compensated.
10. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for OP No.2 has argued the complainant is habitual of filing false complaints before the Commission. The ld. counsel further argued that previously also same complaint has been filed before this Commission and the Forum has allowed and gave Rs.5000/- in lump sum to the complainant Rajinder Kumar and the amount was to be paid by OPs No.2&3.Both the parties filed the appeal and judgment passed by the Hon’ble Commission is on the file, in that the appeal of Britania was accepted and the complaint filed by Rajinder Singh was dismissed.
11. To prove his case complainant Rajinder Singh has tendered in evidence his affidavit,Ex.CA and receipt Ex.C1.
12. On the other hand Mohd Mahsin Beg, Major  of OP No.2 has tendered his affidavit, Ex.OPA and he has deposed as per the written statement.
13. As per the complainant he has purchased five packets of Good Day buttery scoth biscuits from Shubham sweets vide Ex.C1, this receipt is frivolous one. From this receipt it is not proved that the articles mentioned in the same have purchased by Rajinder Singh complainant. So the complainant has failed to prove that he has purchased the biscuits from Shubham Sweets .Strangely enough the Shubham Sweets did not appear to rebut their case. The complaint filed by the complainant is vague one as it is not clear that what relief complainant has sought. Complainant has stated that he has bought five packets of biscuits alongwith othter products from Shubham Sweets and these biscuits were stated to have 26% extra as     printed on the packets and there is one packet of different batch number and not having 26% extra. But none of the biscuits were produced by the complainant alongwith the complaint. So it is not proved on the file whether he has purchased any packets of biscuits which were having lesser biscuits.
14. Previously also the same complaint has been filed by the complainant against Britania Industry and District Forum has allowed his complaint partly . Both Rajinder Singh and Britania went in appeal before the Hon’ble State Commission and the appeal of Rajinder Singh was dismissed and the appeal of Britania was accepted. In para No.9 of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble State Commission it is clearly mentioned that in the absence of any specific evidence no finding could be recorded by District Forum that weight of the packet was less as referred on the wrapper of the packet, so order of the Forum cannot be sustained. So it is clear that  complainant is habitual  in filing of false complaints without any basis just to drag the parties in unnecessary litigations .Thus by going through the facts of the complaint, it is not clear that what relief complainant is seeking from this Commission.
15. So due to our above discussion, it is not clear that complainant has purchased the Britania Biscuits from Shubham sweets. It is also not proved by the complainant that the one of the packet having lesser biscuits and previously the complainant filed a complaint against the Britania industry on the same facts and the appeal of Britania was accepted by the Ld. State Commission. So it is clear that the complainant is habitual in filing of false complaints without any basis and without any record that he had purchased certain goods from Shubham Sweets. Shubham sweets has not appeared to rebut the case and it seems that shubham sweets is hand in glove with complainant to grab money from OP No.2.
16. So due to our above discussion, the complainant has wasted the time of Commission by filing false and frivolous complaint. So the complaint is dismissed with special costs of Rs.5000/- to be deposited by the complainant in the Legal Aid Fund of this Commission.   

ANNOUNCED

DATED:13.8.2021       

                                   Vinod Kumar Gulati        Jasjit Singh Bhinder

                                              Member                             President