Twitter
Advertisement

Parle resident gets Rs15,055 for solidified shaving cream

The Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum recently ordered Nivea India Pvt Ltd to pay Joshi, a Vile Parle resident, a compensation of Rs15,055.

Latest News
Parle resident gets Rs15,055 for solidified shaving cream
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

TRENDING NOW

    If some day you need to shave in a hurry but are unable to squeeze the cream out of a tube you have just purchased, Dattatray Joshi would suggest you to visit the consumer court.
    The Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum recently ordered Nivea India Pvt Ltd to pay Joshi, a Vile Parle resident, a compensation of Rs15,055. This was after he was unable to squeeze cream out of a tube, as the content had solidified.

    On June 2, 2009, Joshi purchased a 70-gm tube of Nivea shaving cream worth Rs55 from Priti medical store in Vile Parle. He failed to extract cream out of the tube while trying to shave the following day.

    He approached the shopkeeper with his complaint, but he washed his hands of the matter by saying that he had sold the tube within the expiry period of 12 months from the date of manufacture. The tube was manufactured in January 2009. Joshi wrote to the company on June 4, 2009, but did not get a reply to his complaint. He then filed a complaint against Nivea India Private limited and Priti medical store in the consumer forum.

    While passing its order, the forum referred to a report of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on the tube. The report, submitted on January 1, 2010, observed: “1.52 gm of solidified cream was expelled from the tube after applying considerable effort. However, this quantity had created a bottleneck at the opening of the tube, making the entire tube unusable.”

    President of the forum JL Deshpande and member Deepa Bidnurkar ordered Nivea to publish an advertisement in a leading English newspaper, warning consumers by citing the said case.
    The forum also observed that the tube’s expiry date was misleading and was considered to be an unfair practice on the part of the manufacturer.

    “According to section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act, any product which is found having faults pertaining to the potency, quality and purity is potent enough to attract penal action. The said product had considerably lost its purity and quality,” observed the forum.

    Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
    Advertisement

    Live tv

    Advertisement
    Advertisement