SMT.MOLYKUTTY MATHEW : MEMBER
This is a complaint filed by the complainant U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 for an order directing the OP’s to pay Rs.15,000,00/- with 12% interest to complainant as damages from 18/10/2017 till realization along with Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation & cost for mental pain and sufferings caused to the complainant due to the deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.
The brief of the complaint :
On 19/8/2017 the 1st complainant purchased cleaning liquid Sani Fresh ultra shine toilet cleaner from 4th OP for the purpose of cleaning bathroom, toilet etc. On 18/10/2017 the 2nd complainant while trying to open the mouth of the bottle of Sani Fresh ultra shine toilet cleaner bottle suddenly the bottle burst with heavy sound and on account of the explosion of the bottle liquid contained in the bottle spread in the room thereby 2nd complainant sustained serious injuries upon her face especially on her eyes. Subsequently the left eye of the 2nd complainant totally lost and partially affected her right eye also. Immediately complainant No.2 was taken by the 1st complainant to the eye specialist Dr.Lalith Surendran at Kuthuparamba and directed to consult the Doctor at Anjarakandy Medical College . On 20/10/2017 she was again consulted to Dr. Lalith Surendran. After the advice of Dr.Lalith Surendran the 2nd complainant got admission in an eye Trust Hospital at Kannur and consulted by Dr.Sankaran and it is found that the injuries upon her left eye is serous in nature and advised to consult the doctors at Aravind Hospital. On 21/10/2017 at night they went to Aravind Hospital and expert Ophthalmologist in the said hospital advised that surgery is required to 2nd complainant and admitted there and surgery has been conducted on 24/10/2017 upon her left eye. Then the 2nd complainant was discharged from the hospital on 26/10/2017 the sight of her left eye is totally lost. After this incident her entire expectation is her life ended in a tragedy. Then the 2nd complainant filed a petition before Kadirur police station stating the entire facts. Still 2nd complainant continues treatment and huge amount is also required for her future treatment also. The 2nd complainant stated that the negligence on the side of 1st OP herein without taking any safety measures while manufacturing such product caused unending misery not only to the 2nd complainant alone but her family also. Hence there is negligent on the part of 1st OP without taking proper care while manufacturing the products and OPs 2 to 4 should have vigilant while selling such product to be bothered about any harm will be caused to the customers while using such product. So there is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice against the OP’s . Hence the complaint.
After receiving notice all OP’s entered before the commission and filed their written version. 1st OP admits that 1st OP is the company manufacturing the disinfectant toilet cleaner by name Sani Fresh ultra Shine Toilet cleaner and 1st OP is the company marketing the product. OPs 1&2 stated that the product has acquired a distinctive reputation on account of the superior quality. 2nd OP sells many number of packs of the said product annually. The product “Sani Fresh” is packed in a durable plastic bottle and there is not even a remote possibility of the bottle bursting . No complaint has ever been received regarding the bottle bursting and there is no possibility of the same. The cautions to be exercised by the consumers are detailed on the label of the bottle including the contents thereof as per the standards specified by the law. No liability can be fastened on OPs 1&2 in the event of failure of the complainants to adhere to the cautions while using he product. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs 1&2. So the complaint may be dismissed with exemplary cost.
The 3rd& 4th OP contended that they are only discharging the functions as employees of Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation which is a public corporation and is a legal entity. It is submitted that various outlets under the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation are selling Sanifresh Ultra Shine toilet cleaner as per the decision taken by the management. A product will be displayed for sale only after passing through the quality control department of the establishment. The said product manufactured by 1st OP which has the approval of the quality control agencies approved by the Government of India as well. So there is no deficiency in service from the side of OPs 3&4. Before receiving the copy of the complaint these OPs 3&4 have no information regarding the alleged accident or about the injuries said to have been caused. Therefore the allegations against OPs 3&4 are not correct and the complaint may be dismissed.
5th OP also contended that he is an unnecessary party in the above complaint. The OP’s specifically stated that there was no possibility of the bottle blasting because there is no explodable materials in the liquid Sani Fresh. No complaints from any other customer have received. OP.NO.5 have no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice to the complainant. So the complaint may be dismissed.
On the basis of the rival contentions by the pleadings the following issues were framed for consideration.
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for any relief?
- Relief and cost.
The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1 and marked Exts. A1 to A19 and MO1& X1 marked. On OP’s side DW1(4th OP) was examined , no documents marked.
Both sides argued the matter and OPs 3 to 5 filed argument note also.
Issue No.1to 3 taken together:
The 2nd Complainant adduced evidence before the commission by submitting her chief affidavit in lieu of her chief examination to the tune of the pleadings in the complaint and denying the contentions in the version. She was cross examined as PW1 by the OP’s. The documents Exts.A1 to A19 and MO1& X1 marked on her part to substantiate her case. According to the complainant No.2(PW1) stated that her husband purchased a bottle of Sani fresh Ultra shine toilet cleaner on 19/8/2017 and on 18/10/2017PW1 opening the bottle cap of the said product burst with heavy sound and the liquid splashed on her face and eye and she lost the sight of her left eye completely and lost sight of the right eye partially . She produced Exts.A1 to A18 documents which clearly shows that her treatment is continued up to 22/12/2021 itself and for further treatment also shown in the documents. In Ext.A19(series) 19 in numbers bills also shows that Rs.16,340/- also incurred for her treatment expenses also. Then the 2nd complainant filed a petition before the commission to send for medical board to examine the complainant to assess the disability of the left eye. The Medical board examined the 2nd complainant and to produce the disability certificate before the commission(10% disability) and marked as Ext.X1. 2nd complainant also produced the disputed Sani Fresh ultra shine toilet cleaner bottle before the commission and marked as MO1. At the time of evidence PW1 deposed that “ നിങ്ങൾ ഡോക്ടറോടും,hospital ലും Sani Fresh bottle പൊട്ടിത്തെറിച്ചു എന്ന് പറഞ്ഞുകാണുന്നില്ല? ഞാൻ പറഞ്ഞിരുന്നു. പൊട്ടിത്തെറിച്ചു നിങ്ങൾക്ക് പരിക്കുപറ്റി എന്നതിന് യാതൊരു രേഖയും കാണുന്നില്ല? No answer. Police ൽ പരാതി കൊടുത്തിരുന്നു. ആയതിന്ർറെ പകർപ്പ് ഹാജരാക്കിയതായി കാണുന്നില്ല? ഹാജരാക്കിയിരുന്നു. MO1 കണ്ടാൽ പൊട്ടിത്തെറിച്ചതല്ല ഒരു കത്തി കൊണ്ട് കീറിയതായാണ് കാണുന്നത് എന്നു പറയുന്നു?ശരിയല്ല . MO1 പൊട്ടിത്തെറിച്ചതാണ് എന്ന് തെളിയിക്കുന്ന യാതൊരു lab നടപടിയും നടത്തിയിട്ടില്ല?ഇല്ല Moreover in the evidence of DW1 who deposed that “ MO1 മൂർച്ചയേറിയ object ഉപയോഗിച്ച് tone ചെയ്തു എന്നു തെളിയിക്കാൻ യാതൊരു നടപടിയും സ്വീകരിച്ചിട്ടില്ല . നിങ്ങൾ ഊഹത്തിന്ർറെ പുറത്താണ് പറഞ്ഞത് എന്ന് പറഞ്ഞാൽ? ശരിയല്ല. കോടതിയിൽ MO1 produce ചെയ്തപ്പോൾ അത് കണ്ട് മനസ്സിലാക്കി പറഞ്ഞതാണ്.
As per the evidence of OP’s they specifically stated that there was no possibility of the bottle blasting because there is no explodable material in the liquid Sanifresh. Moreover no complaints from any other customer have received. Moreover there is no medico legal cases registered and no FIR has been registered. On verification of the bottle there are no signs of bottle blasting and PW1 was not take any lab test or forensic examination to prove that the bottle blasted due to manufacturing defect of Sani Fresh ultra shine toilet cleaner. Moreover the complainant has not examined any one to prove that the bottle has blasted, whether the bottle contains any explodable material, or whether the bottle had actually blasted etc can be found out only by forensic examination. The plastic bottle was being torn with sharp object and there are no signs of blasting.
Though Ext.C1 shows the percentage of disability is 10%, there is no evidence to show that the disability was caused due to the negligence of opposite parties 1 to 5.
Hence taking over all view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the complainant No.2 is failed to establish the allegations against the opposite parties, the same is dismissed.
In the result the complaint stands dismissed. No order as to cost.
Exts:
A1- Prescription dtd.18/10/2017 issued by Kannur Medical college (2 in Nos)
A2-Aravind Eye hospital certificate
A3- Report of Right to information Act dtd.8//12/2017
A4- Ration card sales report copy
A5- Medical prescription dtd.19/10/17
A6- Prescription Eye Trust hospital Kannur
A7- Prescription Aravind Trust hospital dtd.21/10/17
A8-Discharge summary dtd.24/10/17
A9 to A18- Medical prescription
A19(series-Medical bills(19 in Nos.)_
MO1- Sanifresh toilet cleaner empty bottle
X1- Medical Board Report
PW1-Rubeena.K- 2nd complainant
DW1-Anilkumar.K.V-4th OP
Sd/ Sd/ Sd/
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
Ravi Susha Molykutty Mathew Sajeesh K.P
eva
/Forwarded by Order/
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
