THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.: 178 of 2013.
Date of Institution: 09.04.2013.
Date of Decision: -29.10.2015.
Kamal Singh son of Shri Bhagwan Singh, resident of Jain Chowk, Gali Thakur Gangu Singh Ki, Bhiwani, Tehsil and District Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus
- The Customer Manager, Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 52, Sector 32, Gurgaon 122001.
- The Contractor of Wine Shop near bus stand, Fountain Chowk, Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani.
…...OPs.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTIONS 12 AND 13 OF
THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986.
BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Shri Balraj Singh, Member
Smt. Ansuya Bishnoi, Member
Present:- Shri Mukesh Gulia, Advocate for complainant
Shri Satender proxy counsel of
Shri A. Sardana, Advocate for OP no. 1.
OP no. 2 already exparte.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
The case of the complainant in brief, is that on 21.05.2012 he had attended the marriage ceremony of his friend at Charkhi Dadri, Bhiwani. The complainant alleged that he had purchased Carlsberg beer from a wine shop situated near bus stand for a sum of Rs. 120/- bearing batch No. CB-15. It is further alleged that when the complainant opened the said bottle of beer, he saw a dead insect in side the bottle as a result of which, he felt very much ashame in the company. The complainant has also suffered physical loss, mental agony etc. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of respondents and as such, he has to file the present complaint for seeking compensation.He
2. On appearance, OP no. 1 has filed written statement alleging therein that the bottle remains intact till date. It is submitted that the complainant has not furnished any proof of purchase of the bottle or proof of the insect being present in the bottle. It is denied for want of knowledge that the complainant purchased Carlsberg beer from a wine shop situated near bus stand for a sum of Rs. 120/- and neither date of purchase has been mentioned nor any cash memo of the retailer i.e. OP no. 2. It is submitted that complainant has not produced the alleged bottle of bear before this District Forum. It is submitted that the company has an ultra modern well equipped high tech plants where bottles washer machines with PLC system are installed, through which automatically the bottles are washed and cleaned to maximum possible level. Hence, in view of the circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP no. 1 and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3. OP no. 2 has failed to come present. Hence he was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 17.09.2013.
4. In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record Annexure 1 to Annexure 5 alongwith supporting affidavit. Written arguments on behalf of counsel for complainant filed.
5. In reply thereto, the opposite parties have placed on record Annexure RW1/1 to RW1/3 & Annexure R-4 alongwith supporting affidavit.
6. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
7. Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that no bill is issued by the contractor of wine and beer at the time of the sale of the product of OP no. 1. He further submitted that the dead insect is clearly visible in the beer bottle.
8. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 1 reiterated the contents of his reply. He submitted that the complainant has not get tested the beer bottle from the Laboratory to prove the genuineness of the sealed bottle. He further submitted that the complainant has not consumed the said beer bottle, hence no physical injury is caused to the complainant. He submitted that the beer bottle has shelf life of 6 months and the present complaint has been filed by the complainant after more than one year from the alleged date of purchase of beer bottle, with ulterior motive and with a view to extract the money from the Ops.
9. In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the relevant material on record. At the time of arguments, the counsel for the complainant produced the beer bottle to show the dead insect is visible in the bottle. We found that the dead insect was clearly visible in the beer bottle. The genuineness of the seal of the said bottle is not disputed. The contention of the complainant of the dead insect in the beer bottle seems to be true. Admittedly, the complainant has not consumed the said beer bottle and has not suffered any ailment. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant and award a lump sum compensation of Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant against the Ops. The Ops shall be liable to pay the said amount to the complainant, jointly and severally. The complainant is directed to keep the said beer bottle in his safe custody, till the finalization of this order. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Dated:-29.10.2015.
(Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Ansuya Bishnoi), (Balraj Singh),
Member. Member
