Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

RP/12/65

CIPLA CO. - Complainant(s)

Versus

VISHAL - Opp.Party(s)

18 Sep 2015

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PLOT NO. 76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (M.P.)

R.P. NO.65/2012.

 

            CIPLA COMPANY & ANR.                                                           ….PETITIONERS.

 

            VERSUS

 

            VISHAL & ANR. .                                                                 ….RESPONDENTS.

 

 

18.9.2015                  Shri Vivak Agrawal, learned counsel for petitioners.

                                    None for respondent no.1 though served by publication.

                                    None for respondent no.2 though served.

                                    Counsel for petitioners heard.

                        2.         Petitioners / opposite parties have filed this revision petition against the order dated 2.6.2012 passed by District Forum, Indore in complaint case No.1084/2008 whereby their application under section 151, CPC requesting second test of the impugned medicine in accordance with the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940, has been dismissed.

 

                        3.         Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on the application of  the complainant the medicine Stone – 1 syrup purchased by him was sent for examination to Drug Testing Laboratory, Bhopal.  Its report dated 4.11.2009 has been placed on record of the Forum.  Since the said test was done on a sample submitted by the complainant on 18.6.2009, the petitioners / opposite parties are also entitled to have said drug get tested from the Drug Laboratory as per statutory provisions of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act.

 

                        4.         According to complainant, he had purchased a bottle of “Stone 1” syrup from market on 28.4.2008.  Since, on consumption it reacted adversely and caused harm to him it was sent for testing in compliance of the order passed by the Forum.  The test report indicated that the sample contained foreign matter.  Learned counsel submits that since the screw cap of the bottle was found in broken condition at the time of receipt of the sample, the said report was not reliable, therefore, the opposite parties were justified to have the sample tested again.

                                                                

 

                        5.         Admittedly the aforesaid syrup was purchased by the complainant on 28.4.2008 and it was tested after about 1 year.  For about one year the opened bottle remained in custody of the complainant.  In our view, it would now be the abuse of the process of court to send the said medicine for the test again, now in the year 2015.

 

                        6.         In the above circumstances, we find that Forum committed no jurisdictional error in refusing to direct fresh test of the said drug which was purchased in the year 2008.  No miscarriage of justice has been caused to petitioners since they are free to challenge acceptability of the report already placed on record of the Forum.  We, therefore, find no substance in this revision.  The revision is therefore, dismissed.

 

                       

(Justice Rakesh Saksena)                                  (Smt. Neerja Singh)         

                    PRESIDENT                                                    MEMBER