Orissa

Cuttak

CC/161/2023

Dr Sunil Kumar Rath - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager,Vishal Mega Mart - Opp.Party(s)

self

06 Nov 2023

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.161/2023

 

          Dr. Sunil Kumar Rath,

           S/o: SimanchalRath,Plot No.3C/876,

           Sector-10,CDA,Cuttack-753014.                                      ... Complainant.

 

          Vrs.

 

The Manager,

Vishal Mega Mart,Plot No.66-67

Mouza Gada,Gopinath Prasad,

​                  Block-E,Rasulgarh,Bhubaneswar,

                  Dist:Khurda-751010.                                                        ...Opp.Party

 

Present:         Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                      Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:   20.5.2023

Date of Order:  06.11.2023

 

For the complainant:           Self.

For the O.P:                              Sri S.K.Barik,Adv. & Associates.

                       

Sri Debasish Nayak,President.                              

Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that on 17.5.2023 he had purchased 1.50gm. of VEG HAKKA NOODLES packet from the shop of the O.P on 50% discounted priceby paying a consideration of Rs.104/-.  After purchase he could noticed that the product has already expired as there is no date mentioned in the said product.  It is alleged by the complainant that the said expired product was provided by one Liza Rani Pradhan who is theDepartment Manager of the O.P shop. The complainant earlier also had purchased some expired products when he had visited the shop of O.P and thus he had requested for removal of all the said expired products but the O.P did not respond.  Ultimately, he had to file this case before this Commission seeking direction to the O.P in order to refund the consideration amount of Rs.104/- as paid by him to the O.P alongwith compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- towards his mental agony and harassment since because the O.P has been engaged in selling expiry products to the local public and innocent persons.  He has also demanded cost of litigation and for any other reliefs as deemed fit and proper.

          Together with the complaint petition the complainant has filed photo copies of the product as purchased by him from the O.P and purchase receipt showing the consideration as paid by him.

2.       The O.P has contested this case and has filed his written version wherein it is stated by him that the case of the complainant is misconceived, erroneous and untenable in the eye of law.  It is urged by the O.P through his written version that the complainant has filed this case to tarnish the reputation and goodwill of the O.P company.  The O.P admits in his written version that agreeing to the SOP and internal policy, they put all the products on various discount ranges those which are about to expire or are near the expiry date.  But they separate the products from the shop/store those which have already expired as per the date.  The O.P has relied upon various decisions of the Hon’ble Higher Forums thereby harping through those towards the maxim of “Caveat Emptor” and about the “Best Use” formula.  According to the O.P, the complainant has filed this case with a malafide intention in order to get a handsome amount towards compensation from him and the O.P had never sold such product as alleged by the complainant.  It is thus, the contention of the O.P to dismiss the complaint petition as filed by the complainant.

          Together with the written version, the O.P has filed copies of several documents in order to support his stand.

3.       Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version of O.P, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a definite conclusion here in this case.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.         Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P and if the O.P has adopted any unfair trade practice?

iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Issue No.iii.

Out of the three issues, Issue no.ii being the most pertinent issue is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

After perusing the complaint petition, the written version, the written notes of submissions from either sides and on perusal of all the copies of documents as available in the case record, it is noticed that infact the complainant had purchased 1.50 gm “VEG HAKKA NOODLES” from the shop of O.P on 17.5.2023 at 5.32 P.M and had paid a sum of Rs.104/- towards the price.  As per the photo copy of the documents made available together with the complaint petition, in the packet of the said “VEG HAKKA NOODLES” nothing has been mentioned about the expiry date, the manufacturing date as well as the cost of it.  As it appears that 1.50mg of “VEG HAKKA NOODLES” packet was purchased by the complainant from the shop of the O.P for a consideration of Rs.104/- which is a discounted price thereby offering 50% discount to the customer/purchaser.  As per the written version of the O.P, it is clearly understood that the products those which are going to expire in their store, the same were put to discount sale as per their SOP and internal policy.  This signifies the sale of products which are going to expire at the shop of the O.P.  It is the contention of the complainant that on 17.5.2023 he had purchased the said VEG HAKKA NOODLES packet from the shop of the O.P whose wrapper do not reflect about the cost of the product or even the expiry of manufactured date. The O.P thus is silent about the same as to why the sold product lacks the price, date of package and expiry date but wilfully with a malafide intention were selling those to the innocent public at large and thereby were in a process of gaining illegal money.  The product which were thus not wise to be consumed being hazardous and detrimental to human consumption were being sold continuously to the innocent public with an ulterior motive to amass illegal money from them by so doing.  The purchase of those products by the complainant here in this case when not paid any attention even though objection was raised by him to the Customer Care and also to the Store Manager; tilts our eye brows.  The said attitude of the O.P makes us to arrive at a conclusion that infact the O.P was deficient in his service and had rather practised unfair trade by amassing illegal money through sale of unhealthy and expired products to the customers/public.  The O.P has tried to wriggle out from this case by taking the help of certain decisions of the Hon’ble Higher Forums which are basically on the doctrine of “Caveat Emptor” and “Best Use” policy.  After the enactment of the C.P.Act,2019, the doctrine of “Caveat Emptor” is of no use since because ait is the duty of the seller to ensure that the product which he intends to sale is a genuine one in quality, quantity and efficacy for which he receives consideration from the purchaser and the product should carry its date of manufactured,expiry, weight of the product and price thereof. The policy of “Best Use” is also of no use in this case because nothing has been mentioned in the wrapper of the said VEG HAKKA NOODLES packet about the cost of the product and expiry date.     Accordingly, this issue goes in favour of the complainant.

 

 

Issues no.i& iii.

From the discussions as made above, the case of the complainant is maintainable and he is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                              ORDER

The case is decreed on contest against the O.P.  Thus, the O.P is directed to refund Rs.104/- as received from the complainant towards the saidVEG HAKKA NOODLES packetto him which was sold by him.  The O.P is further directed to pay the complainant a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for his mental agony and harassment and a further sum of Rs.30,000/- towards cost of his litigation.  Since because such unfair trade practice has been adopted by the O.P without any caution, the O.P is thus directed to stop such unfair trade practice immediately.  The O.P is directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the State Consumer Welfare Fund also as he was adopting such unhealthy trade through nefarious practice.  This order is to be carried out within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 6^th day of November,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.         

                                                                                 

Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                              President

 

 

                                                                                             Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                             Members