HINDUSTAN LEVER LIMITED Vs. JITENDER KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE complainant purchased the surf of 1 kg. He found it 600 gms. He was not heard by the appellant, therefore he filed the complaint before the learned Forum. The learned Forum allowed the complaint for refund of the price for 400 gms which was less and compensation of Rs. 5,000/ -, cost of litigation of Rs. 2,000/ - and also levied a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/ - to be deposited in the Govt. Treasury, against which order the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) THE complainant Sh. Jitender Kumar Gupta has purchased 1 kg. of surf in sealed condition from opposite party No. 3, M/s. Ashok Kumar Anil Kumar, who is retailer. This retailer has received one carry bag of 30 packets of 1 kg. each from opposite party No. 2, M/s. Raja Ram Nanak Chand, who is said to be distributor. The opposite party No. 1, Hindustan Lever Limited is said to be manufacturer. According to the complainant on 15.12.1995 he purchased one packet of surf from M/s. Ashok Kumar Anil Kumar vide cash memo for Rs. 54/ -. He weighed the said packet of surf and found its weight only 600 gms. According to the complainant he went to the opposite party No. 3 but when he did not get any satisfactory reply, he made a complaint to opposite party No. 1 on 28.12.1995. There was no action then he sent another letter by registered post on 12.2.1996 attaching the copy of the letter dated 28.12.1995. He was assured that he shall be given 3 of surf of 500 gms each as a matter of good gesture and the complainant should finish the matter. When the representative of the appellant did not contact, the complainant sent another letter to the opposite party No. 1 on 18.3.1996. He was not heard, then he gave notice through his Counsel on 24.4.1996. It was replied that the decrease in weight is possible due to atmospheric and weather conditions. The complainant again wrote a letter on 19.6.1996 but he was not heard. Then he filed the complaint before the learned Forum.

(3.) WE will take first the written statement of the opposite party No. 3. He has admitted the sale, cash memo and the price of the surf of 1 kg. as Rs. 54/ -. He has specifically admitted that the packet regarding which the complaint was made was manufactured by opposite party No. 1. When he asked the complainant to leave the packet with him, the complainant did not leave the packet. He has alleged that he has purchased the carry bag of the disputed surf from opposite party No. 2, M/s. Raja Ram Nanak Chand, who is the distributor. He has admitted that he did not suspect about the weight, therefore, he never weighed the packets. He has also admitted that the carry bags are always given to them in sealed condition. The opposite party No. 3 appears to have admitted every fact, however he did not say that the packet, which was sold to the complainant, was of inadequate weight. He only said that he has purchased it from M/s. Raja Ram Nanak Chand and he has specifically admitted that the disputed surf has been purchased from opposite party No. 2. Disputed means disputed and that is the packet in dispute.