JUDGEMENT
A.K.ANNAMALAI, J. -
(1.) The complaint filed under Section 12 & 17 of the Consumer Protection Act-
1986
The details of complaint in brief as follows :
Complainant being the Journalist, RTI activist, Consumer Protection
Activist & Social worker, filed this complaint against the opposite party
manufacturers and suppliers of the Kohinoor Brand of Condoms, for not
providing the right specification and indication of the same on the
covers of condoms sold which is a branded item where basic facts have
been suppressed the specification applicable to Indian have not been
adhere. Selling of uniform size with other countries specifications to
all the consumers in India is most dangerous matter causing Aids,
dissatisfaction, wrong matching and sexual dissatisfaction, unwanted
pregnancy, psychological disorder, Family disharmony and other related
problems and thereby directing the opposite parties to desist from such
activity of deceiving public hence fort declaration of the suppliers as
on date filing the complaint not fit for consumption/usage in India and
its Indian customers and make a large scale advertisement to the effect
and suitability with any applicable to a particular segment to whom the
said specification is applicable and to award Rs.90 lakhs as costs and
interest from the date of filing the complaint and direct the company to
mention the specification according to preference of the consumers.
(2.) The opposite party filed the written version denying the allegations
of the complainant and in the written version it is stated that the
complaint is not maintainable and the complainant is not a consumer. The
opposite party is not the manufacturers of Kohinoor condoms and the
opposite party neither now as TTK Health Care Ltd is only a distributor
of the products manufactured by TTK-LIG Ltd., which is a different legal
entity. The complainant has not stated what is the standard of
manufacturing required for the product and no proof is so that the
product is defective and it for the defective products complainant should
follow the procedure prescribed under the Act. The opposite party being
the distributor has no particular knowledge about standard specifications
and the process of manufacture of the product and is not competent to
specify the same. However regarding the details of manufacturer TTK LIG
Ltd., has given the affidavit giving all the details which is filed along
with the version. The report filed by the complainant are nothing to do
with the product manufactured by TTK LIG. TTK LIG or the opposite party
is not deceiving the public as stated by the complainant since there is
no manufacturing defect. Opposite party is not liable to pay any amount
towards the imaginary figures of damages claimed by the complainant and
the complaint to be dismissed with heavy cost under Section 26 of the Act
for frivolous and vexatious complaint and thereby the complaint to be
dismissed.
(3.) The complainant filed proof affidavit and his side documents Exhibit
A1 to A4 are marked. For opposite party proof affidavit along with the
documents Exhibits B1 to B7 are marked.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.