Case No. 174/2010   

IN THE MATTER OF

1. Suresh Chandra age about 42 years S/o Sri PremRaj
2. Babli age about 20 years S/o Suresh Chandra
3. Anil S/o Suresh Chandra
4. Km. Babita D/o Suresh Chandra age about 15 years
5. Km. Neha D/o Suresh Chandra age about 14 years
6. Km. Joyti  D/o Suresh Chandra age about 8 years
7. Km. Rani D/o Suresh Chandra age about 6 years
8. Kuldeep age about 7 years all R/o Sarai Garhi Sasni Gate Aligarh      

                                           V/s

1. Vrandaban Agro India Ltd. gram nagla Ummed Post Ruheri Hathras By M.D.
2. Devesh Kumar age about 25 years S/o Girrajkishore M/s Fantastic Cold Drinks, JaiGanj Aligarh  

CORAM

 Present:

1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
2. Shri Alok Upadhayay, Member
3. Smt. Purnima Singh Rajpoot, Member

PRONOUNCED by Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President

JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for following reliefs-

1. OPs be directed to pay compensation Rs.35000 for physical and medical sufferings.
2. Ops be directed to pay compensation Rs.1800000 for economic loss and mental agony and loss of love and affection on account of loss of the deceased as a mother and wife.
3. Ops be directed to pay Rs.15000 as litigation expenses.

2.  Complainant has stated that the Op no.1 is the manufacturer of cold drink Limca and Op no.2 is its retailers. On 19.7.2009 Decease Mithelesh, wifo of complainant Suresh Chandra and mother of complainant no. 2 to 8 purchased cold drink Limca 600ml from OP no.2 and when the cold drink was taken by the complainant no.2 and her mother Mithelesh (deceased), they felt uneasiness and were brought Maheshwari Hospital where they were admitted from there Mithelesh was referred to Milkhan Singh  Hospital, Aligarh .On the way Mithelesh died and complaiant no.,2 could be saved having undergone treatment. Complainant no.1 loudged the F.I.R. and the remaining cold drink was taken into possession by the police .which was sent for investigation and Mithayal carbonate insecticide with Ethiel Aclcohal were found in the colddrink which are poisonous substances which caused death of Mithelesh. Postmortem of the dead body of Mithelesh was conducted. Complainant had further stated that there are minor children of the deceased Mithelesh and she had been earning about Rs.8000 per month to maintain the family. Complainant no.1 who is the father of the children, earns through selling the fruits and manages to feed the family members.    
3. OP no.1 stated in WS that there is no evidence of purchasing the cold drink Limca 600ml by the complainant and there may be duplicate Limca manufactured in the local market. The cold drink might have been manufactured at the local label and someone might have mixed the poisonous substance in the cold drink which was used complainant. A F.I.R. was lodged in the matter and the open cold drink bottle was taken from the spot and was sent for test where a Mithayal carbonate insecticide with Ethiel Aclcohal were found in the cold drink. In the postmortem  report the cause of death is not clear and Viscera has been sent for test. 
4. Op no.2 stated in WS that there is no evidence of purchasing cold drink limca 600ml from the OP. The sealed bottles of cold drinks are purchased from OP no.1 and the sealed bottles are sold in the market by the OP who is the authorized distributor of the OP no.1. The open bottle place of occurance was sent for test where the Methial Carbonate insecticide and Ethial Alcohal were found in which are not used in Limca. OP no.2 sells the sealed bottles of colddrinks manufactured by the OP no.1 who is liable for defect found in the cold drink.   
5. Complainant has filed his affidavit and papers in support of his pleadings. Ops have also filed affidavit in support of their pleadings.
6. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.
7. The first question of consideration before us is whether the complainant is entitled to any relief?
8. Complainant has filed copy of F.I.R. U/s 273 /304A IPC and postpartum report of deceased Mithelesh which support the complainant’s case. Complainant has also field discharge report of Babli complainant no.2 which shows that she was admitted on 19.7.2009 in Maheshwari Hospitl,Aligarh for the treatment of food poisoning. There are payment receipt and prescription issued by Maheshwari Hospital. Thus there is sufficient evidence to show that the deceased Mithelesh and her daughter Babli complainant no.2 had suffered from food poisoning and they were brought to hospital for treatment. Parties have admitted the presence of poisonous substances  Mithayal carbonate insecticide with Ethiel Aclcohal  in  cold drink. Report dated 8.6.2010 is on record. Thus the relationship of poisonous cold drink with the deceased Mithelesh and her daughter Babli is established. OP no.1 is the manufacture of the cold drink and op no.2 is its authorized dealer who had sold the poisonous cold drink manufactured by the OP no.1. As the sealed bottle are sold and therefore OP no.1 who is the manufactured of the cold drink is liable for selling the defective goods. Therefore OP no.1 is liable to pay compensation to the complainant. Complainant no.2 Babli had under gone treatment as per papers on the records. Complainants are entitled compensation Rs.35000 for complainant no.2 Babli. Complainant has alleged the amount Rs.6000 as monthly earning of deceased Mithelesh and amount Rs.1000 might have been incurred by her and the net incomes comes to Rs.7000 per month. Complainant Suresh Chandra the husband of deceased is 42 years old and keeping in view her age 40 years, loss of earnings is calculated at Rs. 7000*12*20=Rs1680000. The deceased had 7 minor children and her husband is also alive and therefore compensation for love and affection may be assessed at Rs. 100000 expenses and total compensation is Rs. 1780000 out of which 50% amount shall be paid to the complainant no. Suresh Chandra and the remaining 50 % amount shall be paid to remaining complainants in equal shares.
9. The question formulated above is decided in favor of the complainant.
10. We hereby direct the Op no.1 to reimburse the complainant at Rs.1780000 out of which 50% amount shall be paid to the complainant no.1 and the remaining 50% amount shall be paid to remaining complainants in equal shares.  Op no. 1  shall also pay to complainant Rs.35000 as compensation for harassment and Rs.15000 as litigation expenses.
11. Op shall comply with the direction within 30 days failing which Ops shall be prosecuted for non-compliance in accordance with section 72 of the Act for awarding punishment against him.
12. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
13. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.