CADILA LABORATORY LTD Vs. JAMES AMBROIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the opposite party No. 3.

(2.) The complainant shown as Respondent No. 1 is the consumer. The Respondent No. 2/ opposite party No. 1 is the retail dealer. Respondent No. 3/opposite party No. 2 is the whole sale dealer. The Appellant/opposite party No. 3 is the packer-cum-marketer.

(3.) The facts of the case are quite simple. The complainant purchased from opposite party No. 1 a Second Nature Talcum Powder weighing 400 gms. on 30-12-92 and paid Rs. 46.50. When at home he compared the price with the one paid last time and he found that it was only Rs. 38.50. He noted that there was a superimposed price label and on suspicion he removed it and found that the original price printed on the tin was Rs. 38.50. The opposite party No. 3 admitted that he affixed the new price and claimed that he had every right to do so. The opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 declined responsibility in the matter. The District Forum in the order dated 13.9.93 found that the price ought not have been modified by the opposite party No. 3 and ordered him to pay the excess amount of Rs. 8/- is well as a compensation of Rs. 250/- as against the amount of Rs. 1,000/- claimed and ordered also to pay a cost of Rs. 200/-. Aggrieved by that order the opposite party No. 3 has preferred this appeal.