December 18, 2007	Tuesday	Zilhaj 7, 1428

LAHORE, Dec 17: The District Consumer Court presiding officer has ordered a company, manufacturing shampoo and soaps, to pay a consumer Rs50,000 in damages because of the injury she suffered in lifting the lid of the bottle.

The court also ordered the company to pay the petitioner Rs20,000 against the cost of litigation, besides taking off the shelves faulty bottles.

Petitioner Naeema Aslam said she bought a bottle of shampoo ‘Sunsilk Black’. As she lifted the lid, it left a deep cut on her right thumb, which started bleeding profusely.

She said the bottle was defective as the end of the lid had a sharp protrusion. The petitioner said she was a diabetic and a heart patient and suffered agony because of the injury that lasted almost a week.

She sent a legal notice to the company, asking it to pay Rs550,000 and remove the defective bottles from the market.

Her counsel said his client had proved her case by producing evidence in the shape of the receipt of the purchase of the bottle, the bottle itself and the medical prescription for the treatment.

When the court required the company’s explanation, its counsel said the court had no territorial jurisdiction because their registered office was located in Karachi, and it had no sub-office in Lahore. The counsel said under the definition of ‘product’ as given in the Punjab Consumer Protection Act 2005, a container or a bottle did not fall under it.

He said the shampoo, which was not defective as admitted by the petitioner herself, contained in the bottle fell under the definition of the ‘product’. The counsel argued that the petitioner had failed to prove her case that she suffered damages of injury, and prayed the court for the dismissal of the petition.

After hearing the argument, the judge said the bare examination of the bottle revealed that the edges of its lid were rough and could cause injury to fingers or thumb.

Besides, there was no warning on the bottle that it should be opened with care otherwise it would cause injury, the court said.

The court said the company’s argument that this court had no territorial jurisdiction could not be taken into account.

It said it was an admitted fact that the respondent company was doing its business in almost every city of Pakistan through its authorised dealers or distributors.

“The petitioner has purchased the bottle from Lahore and sustained injury in her right thumb. Therefore, according to Section 27 Clause (C) of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005, the cause of action has wholly arisen at Lahore, this court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the matter,” the court decided.

The judge said the shampoo bottle with its shape, design and trade mark, was a registered item under the Tade Mark and Patents Law and no other individual or entity could use the same. “Therefore, the bottle along with its contents is a product of the company,” he declared.

The judge also ruled out the need for a laboratory examination of the bottle, stating from the mere examination of it revealed that it was faulty.