Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/168/2015

Mr.M.Rajesh - Complainant(s)

Versus

United Breweries Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.P.Prince Premkumar

23 Feb 2018

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  07.10.2015

                                                                Order pronounced on:  23.02.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

    2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

                    TMT.T.KALAIYARASI, B.A.B.L.,           MEMBER II

 

FRIDAY  THE 23^rd  DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018

 

C.C.NO.168/2015

 

Mr.M.Rajesh,

S/o.Mr.Manoharan,

No.20, Velayudha Pandian Street,

Old Washermenpet,

Chennai – 600 021.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

1.United Breweries Ltd.,

Rep.by its Authorised Signatory,

Level 3, 4 & 5 UB Tower,

UB City, 24 Vittal Mallaya Road,

Bangalore – 560 001.

 

2.The District Manager, Chennai (North),

IMFS Department,

TASMAC Ltd.,

TASCO Unit, B4 Flats Industrial Estate,

Ambattur, Chennai – 600 053.

 

3.Shop Incharge,

Shop No.3, Tasmac Chennai North,

No.50/20, Ethirajsami Salai,

Erukanchery, Chennai- 600 118.

.....Opposite Parties

Date of complaint                                 : 24.11.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : M/s.P.Prince

                                                                    Premkumar,S.Silambarasan,

                                                                    R.Jayakumar

 

Counsel for 1^st opposite party                   : M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co.

 

Counsel for  2^nd  Opposite Party               : S.Muthuraj & M.Jothi Kumar

                                                                (set Ex-parte for non filing of written

                                                                    version)

 

Counsel for 3^rd opposite party                        : Ex - parte     

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

          This complaint is filed by the complainant  claiming compensation with cost of the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant purchased the King Fisher Select Premium Beer  on 10.01.2015 at the 3^rd opposite party shop with a quantity 650 ml by paying a sum of Rs.120/-. The said beer bottle  was manufactured by the 1^st opposite party and it was sold by the 2^nd opposite party. The 3^rd opposite party shop is maintained by the 2^nd opposite party.

          2. The complainant about to open the beer bottle, he found heavy dust inside the bottle and not in a fit condition to drink and the same to be injuries to health. The quality of the beer manufactured by the 1^st opposite party is not at all fit for human consumption. The 2^nd opposite party should have taken steps to check the quality of liquor and there after purchased and  sold the same in the market. Due to this the complainant  suffered with metal agony.

          3. The complainant sent legal notice dated 23.01.2015 to the opposite parties claiming compensation and again sent another notice dated  03.03.2015 to the 1^st opposite party and another notice dated 26.08.2015 to the 3^rd opposite party. However, there was no reply from them. The act of the opposite parties amounts to an unfair trade practice. Hence the complainant filed this complaint claiming compensation with cost of the complaint.  

4. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE 1^st  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          The process consists of malting, milling, mashing, lathering, boiling & hopping, fermenting, conditioning and filtering. The glass bottles are sent to bottle washer where the bottles pass through pre washing process for removing organic waste. The bottles after travelling in caustic bath for 18 minutes and thereafter passed through water zones and water sprays to remove the loosened dirt, labels and other materials. The final and pre final rinse sprays of nine numbers are placed in such a way that the high pressure water is sprays at inside and the outside of the bottle to remove any material inside and outside the bottles. Thorough inspection is done at different stages of the brewing process, fermentation process, filtration process, and packaging process to ensure quality standards and norms are met. Further strict Internal and External Audits are performed by trained auditors both internal and external to ensure compliance to quality standards set by the company. In the meanwhile the excise authorities take samples from the uni tank and send the same for chemical examination to Regional Forensic Laboratory at Chennai. It is after the above process throughout which there is absolutely no chance of any contaminated elements to enter the beer manufactured and bottled that the product is sent to the market.

5. The 2^nd opposite party places order on the 1^st opposite party’s factories in the state of Tamil Nadu for supply of IMFL and instructs this opposite party to dispatch the same to its various deposits located strategically in the State of Tamil Nadu. This opposite party executes the said orders and dispatches the said product in well packed cartons. The  depots in turn deploy their own transport and personnel to distribute the same to various TASMAC shops located in Tamil Nadu with due care and caution the beer was manufactured by the opposite party and he has not committed any deficiency in service and prays to dismiss the complaint with costs.

          6. The 2^nd opposite party appeared through his counsel and however  he had not filed his written version and hence he was set ex-parte on 05.04.2016. The 3^rd opposite party though received notice and did not appear before this Forum and he was set ex-parte on 27.01.2016.

7. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

8. POINT NO :1 

          It is an admitted fact that the 1^st opposite party  is the manufacturer of King Fisher Select Premium Beer  bottle and the 2^nd opposite party buying those product and selling the same throughout Tamil Nadu like the 3^rd opposite party shop and the complainant  purchased 650 ml bear bottle at the 3^rd opposite party shop on 10.01.2015 under Ex.A1, bill.

          9. The complainant  alleged deficiency against the opposite parties is that after purchase of the beer bottle, he found heavy dust inside the bottle which seems to be injuries to health and hence he had not opened and consumed the bear and the dust found inside the drink shows that the 1^st opposite party  has not taken proper care and caution in a hygienic circumstances and that is why dust was available inside bottle and the opposite parties 2 & 3 without verifying quality of the drink sold  the same in the market and therefore all the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service.

          10. Admittedly the complainant  purchased the 650 ml King Fisher Select Premium Beer   on 10.01.2015 at the 3^rd opposite party shop. According to the complainant  he found the dust inside the bottle and the same is injuries to  health and hence he did not drink. Hence he sent legal notice to the opposite parties claiming compensation and there was no reply from them, he had filed this complaint. The beer purchased by the  complainant produced before this Forum and the same was sent for analysis and report received from Food Analysis Laboratory, King Institute Campus, Guindy, Chennai -32.  The said sample was also analysed by them and Ex.C1  was sent to this Forum. In the said report, it is stated that dust is sediments floating over the liquid weighing and further on  microscopic examination of dusty sediment shows the ‘Presence of   fungus aspergillus spp’ and the analyst opined that  the food is unsatisfactory and sub-standard.

11. As per the report, the beer bottle was manufactured on 03.09.2014 and should be used best before 6 months from the date of manufacturing. It means from the date of manufacturing on 03.09.2014, the same should have been used on or before 02.03.2015.  The complaint was filed on 07.10.2015 in this Forum after 7 months of the expiry of the beer bottle.  Any product after expiry of the permitted period to consume, the product will change its originality and may not be fit for consumption. In this case also the complaint was filed after seven months of expiry of the sample period and thereafter the sample was sent for  analysis at request of the complainant, certainly the same would be sub-standard and unfit product for consumption and that is what happened in this case.

          12. Further the complainant  should have been catituous in filing the complaint before this Forum before the expiry of the consumption  period and after expiry of the said period he had filed this complaint and only wasted the time of this Forum. In view of the above we hold that the complainant has not established that the opposite parties have not committed any deficiency in service.

13. POINT NO:2

Since the Opposite Parties have not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 23^rd   day of February 2018.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 10.01.2015	Tasmac Bill
Ex.A2 dated  20.01.2015	Legal Notice

Ex.A3 dated NIL                     Return cover

Ex.A4 dated NIL                     Acknowledgement card

 

Ex.A5 dated 03.03.2015                   Legal Notice

Ex.A6 dated 26.08.2015                   Legal Notice

Ex.A7 dated 31.08.2015                   Acknowledgement card

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE   OPPOSITE PARTIES :

                                                ……. NIL ……..

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE FORUM:   

Ex.C1 dated 10.05.2016          Certificate of Analysis

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT