Tribunals and Commissions

CHANDRABAI vs SUBHASH KATTI

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 4 April 2006 · Citation: 2006 3 CPJ 88

HON’BLE JUDGES
Chandrashekhar , Rama Ananth J.
RESULT
Appeal disposed of
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 741 words
1.

PARTIES in this order are referred to according to their ranking in the complaint filed before the District Forum.

2.

THIS appeal is by the complainant challenging the order of the District Forum having not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the District Forum in her favour. The admitted facts are that the complainant approached one Dr. Vijaya Desai on a complaint of general weakness. The Doctor after examining the report of Blood Test, Urine Test etc., prescribed four medicines. On the basis of the said prescription, the complainant went to the Medical Stores of the opposite party (for short, "O.P.") for the purpose of purchasing the four medicines. So far as the medicines mentioned at serial Nos. 1, 2 and 4 of the prescription are concerned, the complainant has no grievance. So far as the medicine mentioned at serial No. 3 in the prescription is concerned, the complainant has a grievance because what was found at serial No. 3 was ''Fered Syrup''. But the O.P. gave ''Femed Syrup''. According to the complainant, she suffered Diarrhoea on consumption of the said medicine. Therefore, the complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum. The District Forum having accepted the case of the complainant has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,000 as compensation. The order of the District Forum is under challenge in this appeal by the complainant on the ground that the compensation awarded by the District Forum is inadequate.

The learned Counsel appearing for the O.P. submitted that since the complainant has not produced any evidence to show that Diarrhoea suffered by the complainant was the direct consequence of the consumption of medicine given by the O.P., i.e., Femed Syrup, she is not entitled for any compensation. In support of this contention, the learned Counsel appearing for the O.P. relied upon certain decisions of the National Commission. In the said decisions the National Commission has not stated that a complainant is not entitled for any compensation unless he/she establishes the actual injury suffered by him/her. Therefore, we are of the view that the medicine ''Femed Syrup'' given by the O.P. to the complainant instead of ''Fered Syrup'' was due to sheer negligence on the part of the O.P. If the O.P. had taken due care before giving the medicine to the complainant, he would not have given the wrong medicine. Therefore, in our view, the O.P. is liable to pay compensation in favour of the complainant.

3.

THE District Forum has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,000 as compensation in favour of the complainant without assigning any reasons so as to arrive at that figure. Under Section 14(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the District Forums are conferred with powers not only to award compensation for the negligence but also to award punitive damages. So far as the negligence is concerned, we have already recorded a finding that not supplying the correct medicine was due to the negligence on the part of the O.P. So far as awarding punitive damages is concerned, the Forums are required to take into consideration the conduct of a person while doing his business. In the instant case, the medicine supplied might not have caused a very serious damage to the complainant. But instead of giving the right medicine if O.P. had given any wrong medicine, it is not known what would have been result, in the event if the wrong medicine was consumed by the complainant. Therefore, taking all these facts into consideration we hold that the O.P. is liable to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000 in favour of the complainant. This awarding of compensation to the extent of Rs. 10,000, in our view, should be a message to other Druggists.

4.

IN the result, we pass the following Order: The appeal is disposed of in modification of the order of the District Forum as follows: (1) The O.P. is directed to pay Rs. 10,000 (Rupees ten thousand only) to the complainant within four weeks from today. (2) IN the event if the O.P. fails to pay the amount to the complainant as directed above within the stipulated time, the O.P. is directed to pay interest at 6% per annum on the said sum of Rs. 10,000 from the date of the complaint till realization. (3) The O.P. is also directed to pay Rs. 1,000 (Rupees one thousand only) to the complainant towards the costs of these proceedings.

Appeal disposed of.