By Sri. MOHAMED ISMAYIL.C.V, MEMBER
The averments in the complaint are in brief:-
1. On 28/04/2023, the complainant and his friend went to the Bar of the opposite party and ordered for liquor and beef chilly. But when eating food the complainant had noticed presence of a small piece of steel scrubber in Beef Chilly. So the complainant contacted the opposite party and requested to take action and demanded to provide another plate of beef chilly. But the opposite party did not heed the request for edible food and also misbehaved. Due to the interference of other customers, who were present at the time of incident, the opposite party had given promise to take proper action against responsible person. Later, the complainant had suffered pain in abdomen and other physical discomfort. So on 29/04/2023, in the morning he was taken into Public Heath Centre, Anakkayam and consulted with a doctor. According to the complainant, the physical discomfort and abdominal pain were caused due to contaminated beef chilly served by the opposite party. According to the treating doctor, all the sufferings are caused due to contaminated food of the opposite party. The complainant alleged deficiency in service against the opposite party. It is also alleged that the opposite party had challenged the complainant to proceed legal action against them. Hence the complainant had issued a notice to the opposite party, but the opposite party issued a reply notice raising false and incorrect contentions. The acts of the opposite party had caused mental agony, hardship and inconvenience to the complainant and the same are amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The complainant prayed for directions to the opposite party to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation and to pay cost of the proceedings.
2. The opposite party appeared on notice and submitted written version denying allegation of the complainant.
3. According to the opposite party, the complaint is filed as a retaliatory measure to wreak vengeance and to defame the reputation of the business carried out by the opposite party. The opposite party denied that the complainant had served with contaminated food containing a small piece of steel scrubber and the same was reported to the opposite party as false and incorrect. The opposite party also denied allegations that they did not serve edible food. There was no occasions for misbehaviour and no promise was given with effect to any action on alleged incident. It is contended that the food consumed by the complainant had never caused any harm to him and all allegations are concocted one. There was no deficiency in service from the side of the opposite party. According to the opposite party, the complainant had kept inimical terms with the opposite party due to intervention made by them in preventing unlawful activities of the complainant and his companion inside the premises of the opposite party. It is alleged that the complainant and his men were used to come into the Bar and take alcohol and created problems. So they had made complaints before police authority. According to the opposite party, the actions taken against the complainant had prompted him to file this complaint. Hence the complainant is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the complaint.
4. The complainant and the opposite party have submitted proof affidavits in lieu of evidence. The documents on the side of the complainant are marked as Ext.A1 to A6. Ext.A1 document is the copy of bill dated 28/04/2023 for Rs.1360/- issued by the opposite party to the complainant. Ext. A2 document is the OP ticket dated 29/04/2023 issued from Primary Health Centre, Anakayam in favour of the complainant. Ext.A3 document is the photograph of the small piece of steel scrubber. Ext. A4 document is the copy of notice dated 09/05/2023 issued by the complainant to the opposite party. Ext.A5document is the acknowledgement card showing receipt of notice by the opposite party. Ext. A6 document is the copy of reply notice dated 17/5/2022 issued by the opposite party to the complainant. The opposite party has produced a pen drive containing news telecasted on a visual media channel with regard to offence allegedly committed by the complainant in a criminal case and the same is marked as Ext.B1 document.
5. Heard both sides in detail. The Commission examined records on file. The following points are considered for adjudication of the matter:-
- Whether the act of the opposite party is amounted to deficiency in service?
- Relief and cost?
6. Point No.(i) & (ii):-
The Commission is considering the above points together for the sake of convenience. The allegation raised by the complainant is that, he had served with contaminated food by the opposite party which had caused physical discomfort including abdomen pain. As a result, it the complainant had undergone treatment as per Ext. A2 document. The argument of the complainant is that on 28/04/2023, he had went to the Bar of the opposite party and consumed a beef chilly along with alcohol. The complainant produced Ext. A1 document in that regard. Ext.A1 document would show that the complainant had spent Rs. 1,360/- for the items consumed from the Bar of opposite party. It is further argued that he had noticed presence of a small piece of steel scrubber in beef chilly. The incident reported to the opposite party , but they were not substituted edible food by replacing the contaminated item and even misbehaved by stating to proceed with legal action . According to the complainant, the act of serving of contaminated food caused physical discomfort and abdominal pain to him and caused consultation with a doctor as per Ext. A2 document. The act of the opposite party is deficiency in service because the presence of small piece of steel scrubber caused serving of contamination of food.
7. On the other hand, the opposite party argued that the complaint is concocted one and filed as a retaliatory measure to wreak the vengeance towards them as they had made complaints before the Police authority on earlier occasions against the complainant, who had involved in unlawful activities inside the premises of the opposite party. According to the opposite party there is no deficiency in-service from their side and no evidence is adduced in that regard by the complainant.
8. In the evaluation of evidence, it is find that the complainant had visited the bar managed by the opposite party and availed the items as per Ext.A1 document. It is also come out in evidence that the complainant had consulted with doctor as per Ext. A2 document. But the Commission find that the complainant has failed to prove that allegation of the physical discomfort and abdominal pain suffered by him as result of deficient service of the opposite party. According to the complainant, he found small piece of steel scrubber from beef chilly which caused contamination resulting physical discomfort and abdominal pain. But there is no evidence available before the Commission to show that the presence small piece of steel scrubber caused trouble to the complainant. Ext.A1 document would show that the complainant had consumed alcohol mineral water, fresh juice, pickle, and fryums along with beef chilly. So it is not possible to ascertain what caused physical discomfort and abdominal pain to the complainant. Moreover, the complainant also failed to take any steps to prove that the presence of small piece of steel scrubber caused damage to the food with help of a lab report. Moreover, Ext. A2 document produced by the complainant would not reveal the cause for abdomen pain and physical discomfort. Hence the Commission find that the documents produced by the complainant are not sufficient to support the pleadings in the complaint. Hence, in the light of the above findings, the Commission dismiss the complaint due to lack of evidence.
Dated this 25th day of October, 2024.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A6
Ext.A1 : Document is the copy of bill dated 28/04/2023 for Rs.1360/- issued by the
opposite party to the complainant.
Ext. A2 : Document is the OP ticket dated 29/04/2023 issued from Primary Health
Centre, Anakayam in favour of the complainant.
Ext.A3 : Document is the photograph of the small piece of steel scrubber.
Ext. A4 : Document is the copy of notice dated 09/05/2023 issued by the complainant
to the opposite party.
Ext.A5: Document is the acknowledgement card showing receipt of notice by the
opposite party.
Ext. A6 : Document is the copy of reply notice dated 17/5/2022 issued by the
opposite party to the complainant.
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Ext. B1
Ext.B1 : Pendrive.
MOHANDASAN K., PRESIDENT
PREETHI SIVARAMAN C., MEMBER
MOHAMED ISMAYIL C.V., MEMBER
