1. According to the narrow compass facts mentioned in this complaint, complainant Altaf Hussain purchased five crates Coca-cola bottles and one crate Fanta brand beverage from the Malik Nasir Pan Shop and mini General Store situated Chungi No.8 near Sadabahar building, Sialkot. He purchased the bottle from respondent No.2 on 22-10-2008. After purchasing these bottles thereafter, when he checked it, he fined one Fanta bottle that some rust type thing was floating in it.
2. The said bottle was not fit for human health. After ascertaining this fact he made a complaint to the respondent No.2 for the substandard of the bottle and requested him to return the same alongwith the price of the bottles. Respondent denied to the request of the complainant.
3. Complainant got mental torture and financial loss due to the act of the respondent, hence he is entitled for Rs.1,548/-alongwith Rs.10,00,000/- as damages.
4. After filing this complaint, notices were issued to the respondent. Respondent put up his appearance before the court submitted their written reply. After filing the written reply this court directed to the both parties to submit their list of witnesses. Complainant himself appeared as AW1.
5. No other AWs is produced before the court as for to corroborate his statement. On the documentary side complainant produced Laboratory report (Pakistan Council of Scientific & Industrial Research), Laboratories complex, Ferozepur Road, Lahore as Ex-AW1, bill for purchase of the bottles as Ex-AW2, photo copy of the legal notice as Ex-AW3, copy of the postal receipt as Ex- AW4, 5, 6/7 and closed his documentary evidence. On the other hand respondent produce Shakeel Aftab sales Manager Coca-Cola as a sole RW1. No other RWs is produce as for the corroboration of his statement.
6. Arguments heard.
7. Record perused.
8. The first question which is raised in the written statement that complainant is not a consumer as, provided in the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005. This question is an important and significant, whether complainant rightly approached to this court. According to the statement of the complainant and contents of the complaint he purchased Coca-Cola bottles comprising of five crates and one crate for the Fanta Beverage which is manufactured by the Respondent No.1. It is not denied by the respondent that the said alleged Beverage is not manufactured by him. It is further admitted in his statement that respondent company is Private Limited Company and is one of the leading manufacture / distributor of aerated Beverage inter-alia Coca-Cola, diet Coke, Fanta and Sprite etc. This is the one of the own admission of the respondent in his written reply hence, it can safely be considered that complainant being a consumer under the respondent, rightly approached to this court as for to redress his grievance.
9. The next question before the court is that if complainant has got no cause of action or he has no local standee to file this complaint. To answer this question I resorted to the testimony furnished by the complainant and respondent.
10. The complainant has purchased the bottles which manufactured is by the respondent and thereafter, he find it that some rust like thing was floating in the bottles. After that he approached to the respondent and made complaint to him for the adulterated bottles which was find against the use of human being. It is pertinent to mentioned here that both the parties request to the court for to analyze the bottles purchased by the complainant and manufactured by the respondent.
11. Both bottles produced by the respective parties were sent to the authentic laboratory for its analysis. Vide report as Ex-AW1 which is test report, in the said report laboratory it is specifically mentioned in its remarks column that the given Fanta Bottle (Sample # A) is microbiologically not safe for human consumption in respect of above mentioned microbes. This is the report which is relied by the complainant. Similar, report which is received by this court at the instance of the respondent it reveled that the said bottle sample sent through this court was checked by the same authenticated laboratory, in its remarks it is enunciated that given Fanta bottle (Sample # B) is microbiologically safe for human consumption in respect of above mentioned microbes. This report is not exhibited by the respondent. However, it is appended in the record which is original.
12. This court, in the interest of justice take judicial notice, these two reports made by the same laboratory are on the file. Both reports quarrel with each other. One is in the favour of the complainant and the other is in the favour of the respondent. Now the important question before the court is, that if the said bottle allegedly purchased by the complainant from the respondent No.2 is the ownership of the respondent No.1 or it is manufactured by some one other bogus company. To answer this question I directly explored the statement of the AW1 and RW1. RW1 is responsible sales manager of the company. In his statement he simply deposed that Malik Nasir Pan Shop, Zafarwal road, Sialkot four five year prior used to purchase his company beverage. Again he deposed in his examination chief that for last six years he is not working with the company of the respondent. In the next bit of his examination chief he admitted in his statement that complainant Altaf Hussain approached to him and demanded his damages. This is the one open admission of the respondent that complainant after purchasing Coca-cola and Fanta beverage allegedly purchased by him approached to the company. I hectically considered in the written reply and statement of the RW1, but did not find any single word that the alleged bottle purchased by the complainant are not belonging to the Coca-cola beverage or it was purchased from some one else, or the Fanta water filled in the bottle is not manufactured by the Coca-cola company. In the cross-examination this RW again admitted that the said respondent No.2, one year prior to his statement used to purchased the bottles from his company. The respondent has not specifically denied about the alleged purchased bottle hence, I am the legal and confirm view that the said purchased bottle were belonging to the respondent No.1, which was not fit for human being. In this eventuality, I am of the legal view that complainant definitely got a cause of action against the respondent, rightly filed instant complaint for to redress his grievance. He is entitled for to recovered Rs.1,548/- price of the purchased bottles. So for the extent that he is entitled Rs.10,00,000/- for mental torture. There is no evidence on the record on the side of the complainant that he got remained under treatment of the Doctor. He did not produce any prescription regarding use of medicine. Further more claim of the complainant is within time, legal notice given by the complainant to the respondent is admitted. Manufacturer failed to perform his noble duty as desire by the law hence, this complaint is accepted. Respondent is directed to return the purchase amount Rs.1,548/- and for the rest claim of the complaint regarding Rs.10,00,000/-, it is not clarified that how he is entitled for to receive entire amount. However, he has purchased bottles for domestic function. His some close relatives were gathered in his house. In their presence he rightly ashamed and duck down his neck hence, is entitled for Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousands only) as damages. Both respondents are jointly or severely responsible to the awarded amount to the complainant. Copy of this judgment be delivered to DCO, (Authority) for implementation of this order. File be consigned to the record room after its compilation.