RAVIKANTH Vs. S N SUBRAMANYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the facts involved in both the cases are identical and the parties are also same, we dispose of these Appeals by this common order. Parties in both the Appeals are referred to as per their position before the District Forum.

(2.) THE facts of the complainant s case are as follows: The complainant had purchased two bottles of Kinley water both contained 500 ml., for which the shop -keeper charged Rs. 8 for one bottle and Rs. 15 for another bottle. When the complainant insisted the seller for a Cash Bill, he refused to give the same stating that he has been instructed by the Kinley Officers not to give the Bill. But, he was kind enough to give the names of the Officers and their address for the complainant to verify whether he is telling truth or not.

(3.) ACCORDING to the complainant, he telephoned OPs 1 and 2 about the difference in the price in respect of same quality and quantity of Kinley mineral water manufactured by Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages (P) Ltd. They replied that they cannot give explanation over telephone, and on the other hand, they have instructed the complainant to send letter if at all there is any complaint. Thereafter, the complainant had sent a letter dated 11.1.2008 to OP2. But there was no reply from them. He had sent an e -mail to OP No. 1 on 26.2.2008 and 15.3.2008. But for the said e -mail also there was no reply. Thereafter, complainant has made the complaints to several Officers of the State Government. The Joint Director of Food, Civil Suppliers and Consumers and the Controller of Legal Metrology directed OP No. 2 to reply to the complainant immediately under intimation to them. But even for that also no reply was sent by OP No. 2. This has made the complainant to file the complaint before the District Forum alleging deficiency of service on the part of OPs.