BAL KRISHAN Vs. COCO COLA COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order the District Forum, Shimla, passed in Consumer Complaint No. 160/2006, dated 4.5.2009, whereby the complaint of the appellant was allowed and respondents were jointly and severally held liable to pay Rs. 15,000 as damages to the appellant for causing him physical and mental agony. In addition to this, cost of Rs.2,000 was also awarded in favour of the appellant.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the appellant had arranged a outgoing picnic for Naldehra on 25.4.2006 and he along with a group of six friends visited Naldehra where he purchased eatables and soft drinks, i.e. one crate of Maaza soft drink which was manufactured by respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was the bottler, whereas respondent No. 3 is the wholeseller and respondent No. 4 is retailer of the aforesaid Maaza soft drink. The other averments in the complaint are to the effect that when he and his friends had been enjoying the soft drinks and had consumed about 6 -7 bottles, all of them experienced giddiness and started vomiting. Thereafter, on checkup and diagnosis, the appellant and his friends were informed that they had suffered food poisoning on account of consumption of some unhygienic and unclean food stuff. As per report of the Public Analyst, dated 19.9.2006 which is placed on record, out of three bottles of Maaza mango drink (ready to serve fruit drink) two bottles bearing Lab Nos. 2235/1 and 2235/2 are not adulterated with respect to the tests mentioned above whereas one bottle bearing Lab o. 2235/3 is adulterated and not fit for human consumption due to the presence of sufficient quantity of objectionable suspended and deposited foreign matter".

(3.) IN the present case, the appellant had filed the appeal for enhancement of the damages awarded by the Forum below which according to the appellant is too meagre in view of the gravity of the matter.