FINAL ORDER/JUDGEMENT
SMT. SUKLA SENGUPTA, PRESIDENT
The complainant filed the instant petition of complaint U/s 12 of the CP Act, 1986 as amendated up to date.
The fact of the case in brief is that on 02.09.2018 the complainant bought one packet of biscuit under the brand name “Britannia”. Manufacturer of the brand is Britannia Industries Ltd., vide PKB. Dated 12.05.2018 Lot No. 12051895.
It is further stated by the complainant that he bought the said package from Paul and Co. lying and situated at 10, Indian Middleton Street, Kolkata-700013. But no money receipt was issued by the seller. It is further stated by the complainant that after opening the said biscuit packet, he noticed that the biscuit within the packet were not in proper form and he also get bad smells from the said biscuits, the quality of the said biscuit were not up to the mark. After noticing the same complainant went to said shop room from where he got the said biscuit and requested the said goods but the shop keeper did not return the said biscuit because the complainant broken the seal of the packet. The shop keeper asked the complainant to make complaint before the manufacturer company and accordingly, the complainant made a complaint through online to the OP-1. The photocopy of screen shot is annexed herewith as annexure “A”.
After receiving the said complaint, the OP-1 duly replied the same on 03.09.2018 by denying all the allegations and requested the complainant to handover the product in question to be represented of the company. Thereafter, the complainant served a letter to the OP-1 through his Ld. Advocate dated 05.09.2018 and the said letter was received by the OP-1. The photocopy of the said letter has annexed as annexure “B” along with petition of complaint after few days one person claiming him as the representative of the OP-1 came to the house of the complainant and asked for the packet of biscuit in question. But the person said to show any proper identity card as representative of OP-1. The complainant asked that the person of OP-1 to issued any cogent document to show that the receipt of the packet of biscuit in question but the man was not ready to issue any such document. Hence, the complainant did not hand over the packet of biscuit to the said person.
Thereafter, on several occasion, the complainant requested the OP-1 to receive the said biscuit packet in question under proper receipt but the OP did not response his request. Under such circumstances, without having any other alternative, the complainant knocked the door of this forum for getting relief.
It is alleged by the complainant that the conduct of the OP-1 caused harassment, mental pain and agony to the complainant. So, there was deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP-1. Hence, the case is filed by the complainant with a prayer to give direction of the OPs to handover a fresh packet of biscuit and also give direction to pay compensation to the complainant of a sum of Rs. 10,000/- along with litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/-.
The OP-1/Britannia Industries Ltd., has contested the petition of complaint by filing WV /WO denying on the material allegations levelled against him. It is the case of the OP-1 that the complainant has no cause of action to file this case. It is also the case of the OP-1 that the instant petition of complaint is baseless and not maintainable in eye of law.
It is the further case of the OP-1 that the complainant vide letter dated 03.09.2018 intimated the OP-1 to produce the product so that the OP-1 can consider the allegation of the complainant but such product in question never handover to the OP-1 by the complainant. It is further case of the OP that after receiving the letter dated 03.09.02018 sent by the complainant, the OP-1 tried to make contact him on several occasions for getting alleged product and accordingly, letter dated 03.09.2018 was sent on 11.10.2018 to the complainant on email id shared by him and also deputed a representative to collect the sample, but the complainant never hand over the product to the representative of the OP. It is mentioned by the OP that the complainant deliberately avoids to handover the product in question to the OP-1 with an ulterior motive. It is further stated by the OP-1 in its WO that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the OP-1 which can caused any sort of mental pain and agony harassment to the complainant or there was no unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.
The OP-1 did not get any opportunity to examine the alleged product where there was any fault at the time of manufacturing due to non corporation of the complaint which having any expert report, the petition of complaint has no basis at all and is liable to be dismissed.
The OP-2 did not contest the case and the case was declared to proceed ex parte against him by this forum vide order dated 04.09.2019.
In view of above fact and circumstances, the points of considerations are as follows:-
1. Is the case maintainable in its present form and law?
2. Has the complainant any cause of action to file the case?
3. Is the complainant a consumer as per CP Act, 1986?
4. As there any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs?
5. Is the complainant entitled to get relief as prayed for?
6. To what other relief or reliefs is the complainant entitled to get?
Decision with Reasons.
All the points of consideration are taken up together for convenience of discussions and to avoid unnecessary repetitions.
During the course of argument, neither of the parties has challenged the maintainability of the case and jurisdiction of the forum to try this case.
In spite of the same to discharge its statutory obligation the forum has considered the matter after careful perusal of material on record and also considering the position of law, it is revealed that the case is well maintainable in the eye of law and this forum has got the pecuniary as well as territorial jurisdiction to try this case.
Admittedly, the complainant purchased one packet of Britannia biscuit from the OP-2. OP-1 is the manufacturer company of the same. So, the complainant is a consumer under the OP-1 and 2 and both the OPs are the service provider to that effect. But let us see whether the complainant could be able to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubts by adducing cogent document’s, On a close scrutiny of petition of complaint and the annexed documents which have been brought into evidence as annexure “A” and annexure “B”. From where neither the manufacturing date nor the expiry date of the alleged packet of biscuit is shown. Moreover, the complainant did not mention the price of alleged Britannia biscuit in his petition of complaint.
On a close perusal of the material’s on record, it appears that he only made a prayer in his petition of complaint for an expert opinion but during the proceeding of the case he never took any fruitful steps to that effect not even a scrap of paper is there on record to that effect so that the complainant prayed for expert opinion after collecting the sample of alleged Britannia biscuit. So, from his own documents supplied by the complainant, it is crystal clear that the complainant failed to show that alleged packet of Britannia biscuit was defective and not in proper form. Though he supplied some photographs of biscuit as shown “annexure A” but this photocopies cannot be proved that this biscuits are the biscuit of that packet to Britannia biscuit in question. Without having any expert report it cannot be proved by any means that biscuits of alleged Britannia company were defective and rotten and in view of discussions made above, this forum is unable to accept the argument of Ld. Advocate of the complainant that the complainant took every possible steps to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubts rather the complainant failed to put the manufacturing date and expiry date of the alleged packet of biscuit in his petition of complaint which was urgently required to prove his case.
Hence, in view of discussion made above , this forum is of opinion that the complainant failed to prove that there was any sort of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs rather all along he made non corporation with the OP-1 and failed to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubts and is not entitled to get relief as prayed for.
The case is properly stamped.
All the points are decided accordingly.
Hence,
Ordered
That case be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OP-1 and ex parte against the OP-2.
Copy of the judgment be supplied to the parties free of cost as mandated by the CP Act. The Judgement be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for perusal of the party.
