Appeal No. 19612014
Filed on: 1'7.02.2014
Disposed on: 08.03'201 6
STATE coNSUMER DISPUTES
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA
MMISSION. BAN
ORE.
REDRESSAL CO
Pepsico India Hotding Pvt' Ltd'
Registered Offrce at
38; DLF Corporate Park, 'S'Block
Qutab Enclave, Phase III
Gurgaon l22OO2
Through authorized signatorY
(By Sri. Gerald Manoharan)
V/s
Rithu Jain
R/at B-504, AiswarYa ExcellencY
Opposite Tin Factory
K.R. Puram, Old Madra Roacl
Bangalore 5600 16
(ByIn-person)
oRDER
Mr. B.S. TADAHAL. JUDICIAL MDMBER
The appeiiant/OP No. 2 has preferred this appeal being
aggrieved by the order passed in CC' No' 834/2013 dated
31.10.2013 by the I Addl. Bangalore Urban District Consumer
Disputes Redressai Forum, Bangalore'
We sha1l refer to the parties as per the rankings before the
PRESENT
HON'BLE MTS' JUSTICE B.S. INDRAKALA : PRESIDENT
MT. B.S. TADAHAL
: JUDICIAL MDMBER
Mrs. G.T. VIJAYALAKSHMI
: MEMBER
Appeal No. t9612014
Appellant
......Respondent
District Forum.
Lo.-*r''-
DATED THIS THE OSthDAY OF MARCH 2016
2
Appeal No. 19612014
3. The brief facts of the case are as under:
The respondent/ complainant filed this complaint praying to
pay compensation and to review the license of the manufacturing
Kolhapur unit in the interest of proper safety and health
standards.
The complainant purchased I kg. Lehar Shahi Mix bearing
batch No. ES 614 A dated OB.|L2O12 for Rs. 209/- from More
Mega Stores at Old Madras Road, Bangalore on 10.02.2013 at
5.10 p.m. In the house, the complainant after opening it saw one
or two broken pieces of cashewnuts and 5 - 10 pieces of raisins,
whereas packet mentions at Sok of Cashew and 2o/o raisins of
total mixture. Complainant's husband sent an e-mai1 to Op,s
customer care intimating the same arld kept the packet in air
tight container. Further he received reply from Simi Mehta that
they forward the complaint to Kolhapur Manufacturing unit. Op
acknowledged the complaint and after sending 2 e-mails they
called complainant's husband on his mobile and told that
packaging process is proper and neat and there is no chance of
less amount of cashews or raisins in the packet. On 17.02.2013
complainant went to Mega Stores and talked with Shivakumar,
Manager and intimated everything about the matter. On
08.03.2013 complainant decided to eat as it is and when she
Luu'r''o'..
2
Appeal No. 19612014
opened the packet and she filled remaining namkeen in piastic
container and she found cockroach in that namkeen'
Complainant contacted Manager of Mega Stores on 09'03'2013
and Manager himself acknowledged that fried item is cockroach'
Then the Manager sealed the packet with stapler and kept it with
himself and said that on 11'03'2013 he would call the Lehar
Namkeen Distributor and will intimate the sarne' The
complainant also sent 'e-mail to the customer care ID of Pepsico'
but, she did not receive any reply' Then the complainant's
husband took back the said sealed packet from More Mega Stores
on 11.03.2013. On 13'03'2013 one Mr' Sudarshan from Lehar
Distributor of Bangalore contacted complainant and told that
their superior authority Mr. Venkatarannana Mallya is in Chennai
and after his return he will attend to the problem '
On
16.03.20l3Mr.SudarshanandVenkataramanaMallyacameto
the apartment and saw fried cockroach in the packet and talked
about 3O mns. They requested the complainant to return the
packet in the exchange of new packet, but, complainant refused
to do so. They also contacted manager of Mega Stores and asked
for replacement of sealed packet, but, he also refused to do so'
The complainant and her husband are Jains and vegetarian in
-)
b"t u""^-o
Appeal No. 19612014
- nature. The presence of cockroach in namkeen has seriously
hurt their religious sentiment' Hence' the complaint'
4.oPNos.1&3remainedabsentandtheywereplaced
exparte.
5. OP No. 2 appeared before the forum and filed version
denying the allegations' There is no material that complainant
purchased any goods for consideration' There is no mention
about the presence of fried co