State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
National Forum For Consumer Education vs Dhariwal Industries Ltd. on 7 September, 2012
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT NAGPUR
5 TH FLOOR, ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING NO. 1
CIVIL LINES, NAGPUR-440 001
First Appeal No. A/99/238
(Arisen out of Order Dated 06/01/1999 in Case No. CC/97/206 of
District Forum, Akola.)
National Forum For Consumer Education
(Rashtriya Upbhokta Shikshan Sanstha)
166, Ganesh Colony, Gorakshan
Road,
Akola 444 044.
For and on behalf of M.D. Gawande,
P.R. Deshmukh and Y.R. Talmale, all residing at Akola.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Dhariwal Industries Ltd.
Site No. 2,3&4, Singasavdra
Village, Hosur Road,
Bengalurv 560068.
2. M/s. Vishnu and Company,
Motinagar, New Delhi.
3. M/s. R.K. Products,
123/59, Saresh Bagh, Kanpur
4. Commissioner, Food & Drug Administration,
Bandra, In front of Income Tax Office, Mumbai.
...........Respondent(s)
BEFORE:
Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole PRESIDING
MEMBER
HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL MEMBER HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM MEMBER PRESENT:
Mr. Gawande ......for the Appellant Adv. Mr. Agrawal ......for the Respondent Judgment (Delivered on 07/09/2012) PER SHRI S.M.SHEMBOLE, HON'BLE PRESIDING MEMBER.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 06/01/1999 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Akola in Consumer Complaint No. 206/1997 dismissing the complaint and directing the opponents/respondents to deposit amount of Rs.1,000/- each with the Government Anti Tobacco Propaganda Machinery, etc Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that,
1. Appellants/original complainants No. 1 to3 who were ranging about 21 to 22 years of age, and their classmates were habituated to Gutkha Chewing habits, as they were influenced by their friends and associates due to advertisement in media. Therefore, their health was deadly affected. According to the complainants/ appellants, the opponents/respondents who manufacture the tobacco products under the name as Gutkha, etc. are responsible for the same. According to the complainants/ appellants, they used to purchase the same product Gutkha from small dealers of the opponents/respondents and, therefore, the opponents/ respondents are responsible for the same. Therefore, they have filed consumer complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Akola claiming compensation Rs. 60,000/- each. The complaint was filed on their behalf by the Chairman, National Forum for Consumer Education, Akola.
2. The opponents resisted the complaint vide its written version on the following among other grounds:-
They did not dispute that they manufacture the Gutkha but they have denied that same product is having contents of tobacco. It is denied that complainants/ appellants were addicted to chewing of Gutkha due to the influence of advertisement, etc. They have denied that the complainants used to purchase Gutkha from small dealers of the opponents and opponents are responsible for deteriorating their health, etc. It is denied that the complainants are their consumers. It is contended that the complaint itself is not maintainable as there is no brevity of contract between them and complainants. It is submitted to dismiss the complaint.
3. On hearing both the sides and considering the evidence lead by the complainants the District consumer Forum, Akola held that the complainants failed to prove that they are addicted to chewing of gutkha and due to the same, their health is deteriorated, etc. It is held that the complaint itself is not maintainable. In keeping with these findings the District Consumer Forum, Akola dismissed the complaint directing the opponents/respondents to deposit amount Rs.1,000/-
each with the Government Anti Tobacco Propaganda Machinery, etc.
4. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order the complainants have preferred this appeal.
5. We heard Mr. Gawande, Chairman, National Forum for Consumer Education, Akola who represented the appellants/complainants and Adv. Mr. Agrawal for the respondent No.1and perused the written notes of arguments submitted by them. We have also perused the copy of impugned judgment and order, copy of complaint, written version and copies of other documents.
6. At the outset we may point it out here that except the bare words of the complainants there is no iota of evidence on record, firstly to substantiate the averment of the complainants that they were habituated to chewing of gutkha manufactured by the opponent/respondent No.1 and secondly their health is deteriorated due to the same. There is also no evidence on record that the complainants at any time had purchased gutkha from small dealers of the opponents. Therefore, question of any brevity of contract between the complainant and respondent does not arise. Further, the question of complainants being influenced by the advertisement of gutkha through media also does not arise. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the same complaint is maintainable in law.
7. However, Mr. Gawande who is the Chairman of National Forum for Consumer Education, Akola submitted that when the complainants use to purchase gutkha from different small dealers or retailers it is not possible for complainants to obtain any bill to prove the same. It is submitted that retailers or sellers do not issue any bill to the customers. We do admit such facts but in the present case. Though it is the contention of the appellants/complainants that due to chewing gutkha their health is deteriorated, no evidence to that effect is produced. If really the health of the complainants is affected by addiction of chewing gutkha, it would have been easy for them to produce medical certificate and also the case papers pertaining to the medical treatment if any taken by them. But no such evidence is produced on record. Therefore, bare contention of the complainants that they are addicted to chewing gutkha and due to addiction their health is deteriorated, can not be sustained.
8. Mr. Gawande who is Chairman of National Forum for Consumer Education, Akola relying on the decision of Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangaloer in the case II (2005) CPJ 579, Hindustan Coca Cola Berverages Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Ravishankar submitted that a person who was closely and directly affected with such addiction of chewing tobacco products or gutkha is maintainable without production of any purchase bill etc. In the Case of Hindustan Coca Cola Berverages Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Ravishankar (Supra) it is held that through there is no previty of contract between the complainant and manufacturer company, complaint against manufacturer is maintainable, etc. But in the present case there is neither any evidence indicating that at any time they purchased the gutkha from retailers and due to the same, their health is affected etc. Therefore, the decision of the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangaloer can not be applicable to the present case.
9. Mr. Gawande who is Chairman of National Forum for Consumer Education, Akola tried to point out from the report of Public Analyst, State Public Health Laboratory, Pune & submitted that the sample of gutkha product was sent to the said Laboratory and it is found that it contents tobacco products and its injurious to health and complainants/appellants used to consume the same products and they were influenced by the advertisement and they got addicted. But as stated above in the absence of any evidence that the complainants/appellants used to consume the same products and they were addicted and their health is deteriorated, such argument advance by Mr. Gawande can not be sustained.
10. Mr. Agrawal, Ld. Counsel for the respondent No.1 also submitted that the complainants/appellants have failed to prove their averments that they were adducted to gutkha product and their health is deteriorated, etc. He has also submitted that even if the complainant's/appellant's health is deteriorated the respondents are not responsible for it. Since, there is no evidence to sustain the allegations against the opponents/respondents made by the complainants/ appellants we find no hesitation to accept argument advanced by the respondent No.1
11. For the forgoing reasons the District Consumer Forum has rightly dismissed the complaint. We find no infirmity of illegality in the impugned judgment and order. Hence, no interference is warranted.
12. However, Mr. Gawande who is Chairman of National Forum for Consumer Education, Akola giving much stress on the impugned judgment and order directing the opponents/respondents to deposit the amount of Rs.1,000/- each with Government Anti Tobacco Propaganda Machinery and submitted that the same order is being erroneous is not tenable. According to him there is no such Government Machinery so as to comply the impugned order. Since, the complainants/appellants are not affected by the same order, we find no force in the submission of Mr. Gawande. It is for the respondents/opponents to comply the same order.
13. In the result the appeal is being devoid of any merit is liable to be dismissed. Hence, the following order.
ORDER
1. Appeal is dismissed.
2. No order as to cost.
Dated:- 07/09/2012.
[ Hon'ble Mr.S.M. Shembole] PRESIDING MEMBER [ HON'BLE SMT.JAYSHREE YENGAL] MEMBER [ HON'BLE MR.N. ARUMUGAM] MEMBER ay