IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH OF THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADURAI.

PRESENT: THIRU.N. RAJASEKAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER F.A.No.159/2012 (F.A.No.592/2011 on the file of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai)

(Against the order made in C.C.No.94/2010 dated 27.04.2011 on the file of the District Forum, Tirunelveli)

FRIDAY, THE 25^th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 The Factory Manager, Pepsico India Holdings (P) Limited, Wise Park, Indl.Development Area, Kanjikode East Post, Palakad, Kerala State. Appellant/2^nd Opposite Party -Vs-

1. P.Sivamani, S/o Ponnaiah Asari, 22 A, Thaiakara Street, Tirunelveli Town, Tirunelveli District. 1st Respondent/1st Complainant

2. Tirunelveli District Consumer Protection Association, Regd.No.64/91, Through its Secretary D.A.Prabakar, 147, Sankar Colony, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District. 2nd Respondent/2nd Complainant

3. P.M.Ibrahim Store, Proprietor, 1, Koolakadi Street, Tirunelveli Town. 3rd Respondent/1st Opposite Party

4. The Chief Executive Officer-Operation, M/s.Pepsico India Holdings Private Limited, 3 B, DLF Corporate Park, S-Block, Qutab Enclave, Phase-III, Gurgaon – 122 011.

Haryanan State. 4th Respondent/3rd Opposite Party Counsel for Appellant/Opposite Party-2 : Mr.M.Kandasamy, Advocate.

Counsel for Respondents-1&2/Complainants-1&2 : Mr.D.A.Prabakar, Advocate.

Counsel for Respondents-3&4/Opp.Parties-1&3 : Given-up.

This appeal coming before me for final hearing on 30.12.2021 and on perusing the material records, this Commission made the following:-

ORDER

THIRU.N. RAJASEKAR, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant/2^nd opposite party under section 15 read with section 17(1) (a) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order of the learned District Forum, Tirunelveli made in C.C.No.94/2010, dated

27.04.2011, allowing the complaint.

2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties are referred to here as they stood arrayed in the learned District Consumer Disputes Redresssal Forum, Tirunelveli.

3. The 2^nd opposite party suffering by an order, directing the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties to pay Rs.25,000/- jointly and severally to the 1^st complainant as compensation for mental agony and loss caused to him and to pay Rs.3000/- towards cost to the complainant in the hands of the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tirunelveli (hereinafter in short “District Forum”) have preferred this appeal before this Commission.

4. The case of the complaint is as follows:- The 1^st complainant is the member of the 2^nd complainant which is a registered voluntary organization creating consumer awareness in Tirunelveli District. On 29-05-2010, the 1^st complainant has purchased 1 Litre Aquafina mineral water bearing Batch No.B.076/19.3.2010/11.26, Expiry on nine months from the date of manufacture from 1^st opposite party. The said Aquafina mineral water was manufactured by the 2^nd opposite party under the control and management of 3^rd opposite party. The 1^st complainant consumed half of the water and after half an hour he took ill and affected by diarrhea and he was taken to hospital namely Nabiza Hospital Tirunelveli town where some injunction was administered. The 1^st complainant has spent Rs.100/- towards doctors consultation fee and Rs.80/- towards medicines. When questioned by the doctor what he had consumed during the past three hours, the 1^st complainant recollected his memory and stated that he had consumed half liter Aquafina water alone. After returning to his house the 1^st complainant took the aquafina water and verified the date of manufacture. He was shocked to see that in the remaining water in the bottle he found that some foreign substances floating in it which can be viewed with naked eye and apparently visible. Further he noticed that water was specially packed for Railways. He immediately conveyed the matter to the 2^nd complainant and both of them went to the shop of the 1^st opposite party and purchased another