BEFORE GUJARAT STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM

IN THE MATTER OF

KADILA HEALTHCARE LTD, _____________________________________ PETITIONER

VS.

MR.AARAV SHAH
________________________________________________RESPONDENT

______________________________________________________________________________

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

Appeal under Section 17 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order of District
Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum

Name: Sauri Shastri

Sec: B
Semester: 2
Roll No. : 109

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

STATEMENT OF FACTS

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

PRAYER OF RELIEF

2
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

1. SEC - Section
2. VS - Versus
3. HON’NLE - Honourable
4. CO. - Company
5. NO. - Number
6. SCDRC – STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION
7. DCDRFC– DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION

3
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES/ REFERENCES
______________________________________________________________________________
A. BOOKS REFERRED
a. Law of Contracts, Avtar Singh
b. Universal’s Consumer Protection Act, 1986

B. LAWS REFERRED
a. CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986
b. LAW OF CONTRACTS , 1872
- FOOD SAFETY AND STANDARD ACT , 2011
- DRUG AND COSMETICS ACT , 1940

4
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The petitioner has honor to submit before the Hon’ble State Commission under Section 17 of the
Consumer Protection Act.

Section 17 reads as:

Jurisdiction of the State Commission- ​Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the State
Commission shall have jurisdiction-
a) To entertain-
(i) Complaints where the value of the goods or services and compensation, if any,
claimed [exceeds rupees twenty lakhs but does not exceed rupees one crore]; and
(ii) Appeals against the orders of any District Forum within the state; and

b) To call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is
pending before or has been decided by any District Forum within the State, where it
appears to the State Commission that such District Forum has exercised a jurisdiction not
vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested or has acted in
1
exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity.

1
Universal’s The Consumer Protection Act

5
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

VITALITY M CAPSULES- ORIGIN AND CLAIMS

● The Kadila Healthcare Ltd., a pharmaceutical company based in Ahmedabad, made a
multivitamin capsule called the "Vitality-M". The company claimed that the
production of such capsules is purely for the overall health, wellbeing and vitality of
men, and therefore, these capsules are one of the best diet health supplements as these
capsules are very effective and a unique blend of ginseng, vitamins and minerals. The
company announced and marketed that by taking one capsule a day, it provides great
energy as well as helps to fight against tiredness. It enhances the stress handling
ability. The company aggressively fixed the price of each capsule at Rs.40/-.
● The company declared in public interest that these capsules release endocrine
hormones and are prepared to boost immunity as well as help to enhance the quality
of life.
● To stay fit and active during the day, bring home the "Vitality-M" capsules – the
company marketed.

ADVERTISEMENTS
● The Kadila Healthcare Ltd. published advertisements in the reputed newspapers and
other media channels on February 05, 2015, claiming the number of benefits for the
consumption of “Vitality-M" capsules.
● The company mentioned in the advertisement that these capsules have not been
evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration or the FSSAI (i.e., Food Safety and
Standard Authority of India).
● The Company specified in its advertisement that this product is not intended to
diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

ADVERTISEMENT FOR COMPENSATION

● The Kadila Healthcare Ltd. further published advertisements in the same reputed
newspapers and other media channels on September 20, 2015, claiming that it would
give compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to anyone who got sick after using these capsules
according to the instructions provided with it i.e., one capsule a day and this offer is
not retrospectively applicable.
● The statement generated by the Kadila Healthcare Ltd. is as under:-
● “Rs.50,000/- compensation will be paid by the Kadila Healthcare Ltd. to any person
who contracts with the increasing fatigue, weakness or any disease caused by taking

6
 multi-vitamins “Vitality-M” capsules, after having used one capsule a day, according
to the printed directions supplied with the pack of 15, 30 and 60 capsules in a bottle
whose expiry period will be of 5 years from the date of manufacturing. The statement
regarding compensation of Rs.50,000/- was printed on each pack of 15, 30 and 60
capsules.”

POPULARITY OF THE CAPSULE

● During the period of 2015-16, people consumed thousands of "Vitality-M"
multivitamin capsules as preventive against body weakness; fatigue or any other
disease due to deficiency of any vitamin in the body and in no ascertained case any
adverse effect was found by those using these capsules.

​CASE OF MR.AARAV SHAH

● Mr. Aarav Shah, aged 16 years, suffered from malnutrition; chronic fatigue syndrome
and vitamin deficiency that led to muscle weakness in the entire body system. The
doctor recommended him daily intakes of selected vitamins.
● He saw the advertisement of the Kadila Healthcare Ltd., on October 20, 2015
regarding "Vitality-M" multi-vitamin capsules. He bought 5 packs of capsules
bearing the manufacturing and packing date of April 10, 2015. Each pack contained
the dose of 60 capsules.
● He consumed the entire capsules as per the instructions mentioned by the company
for nearly 10 months but after a week he found that his body is heavily relying on
these capsules. He felt a lot of bodily changes due to stop consuming capsules such as
frequent stomach upset; severe allergic reactions; breathing problems; tightness in the
chest; swelling of the mouth, face, lips or tongue; feeling of fatigue and weakness of
the entire body.
● Mr. Aarav Shah discovered that on resuming the consumption of these "Vitality-M"
multi-vitamin capsules as per the usage prescription of the Kadila Healthcare Ltd.
Company, he got relief from all types of bodily changes.
● In the meantime, during March – 2016, the company again aggressively raised price
of each capsule by 50% to Rs.60/- as it found the enormous success and rise in
demand for the product.
● Mr. Aarav Shah after having been firmly believed that his body cannot smoothly
work without consuming these capsules and his body developed an addiction for such
capsules, he felt there was a defect in the goods – “Vitality-M” capsule. He felt
himself cheated by the company as he again cannot afford such a high price
multi-vitamin capsules.
● He, therefore, claimed Rs.50,000/- and other form of compensations from the Kadila
Healthcare Ltd. The company bluntly ignored the claim of Mr. Aarav Shah. After few

7
 days, Mr. Aarav Shah’s advocate sent notice to the Kadila Healthcare Ltd. regarding
his claim of Rs.50,000/- and other compensations.
● On this notice, the company’s officers replied with a letter stating that if it is used
properly, the company had complete confidence in the capsule's efficacy, but "to
protect the company against all fraudulent claims" they would need him to come to
the company’s office to use the capsule each day and be checked by the secretary.
● Mr. Aarav Shah filed a complaint at the Ahmedabad District Consumer Dispute
Redressal Forum through his advocate on August 10, 2016.
● The advocate of his behalf argued that the advertisement and his reliance on it was a
contract between him and the company, and so the company ought to pay.
● The company denied such type of contract on the basis of his minority.
● The District Forum based on the arguments and evidence gave the order in favour of
Mr. Aarav Shah.

8
 STATEMENT OF ISSUES

Issue 1 : Whether there existed a legal contract between Mr.Aarav Shah and the
Pharmaceutical Company

Issue 2: Whether the Pharmaceutical Company i.e. Kadilia Healthcare Ltd. is liable to pay
the penalty

9
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

Issue No. 1:
Considering the facts that under Section 11 of The Indian Contract Act, A minor is
incompetent to enter into any contract as such. Yet there remains an exception to the
clause which states that in case of providing “necessity” to a minor, when it comes to
basic “necessities” required for survival of a person it is valid in the eyes of the law.
In this case, medicines are a bare “necessity” required by Mr.Aarav to conduct his daily
activities and go on with his day. Therefore, it can be considered a valid contract.

Issue No. 2:
Yes, the company is liable to pay compensation to Mr.Aarav Shah as the offer was
generally made to the public at large which does not cease to exist in any matter and
therefore, Mr.Aarav Shah had bought the medicines under the ongoing general offer and
consumed the product with the prescribed guidelines by the company in question, itself.

10
 ADVANCED ARGUMENTS

Issue No. 1: Whether or not the contract between Aarav Shah and Kadila Healthcare was valid?

● It is known that a contract with a minor is “void ab initio” -- barring certain exceptions.
● The Kadila Healthcare Ltd. published advertisements in the same reputed newspapers and
other media channels on September 20, 2015, claiming that it would give compensation
of Rs. 50,000/- to anyone who got sick after using these capsules according to the
instructions provided with it i.e., one capsule a day and this offer is not retrospectively
applicable.
● Through this advertisement, the company gave a general offer which can be accepted if
the tablets are used as prescribed by company in the advertisement. Mr Aarav obeyed
company’s instructions and took the tablets in the prescribed way for ten months . Thus,
2
Mr Aarav has accepted the offer by his conduct and formed a binding contract.
● When minor has performed his obligation:​ In a contract, a minor can be a promisee
but not a promisor. So if the minor has performed his part of the promise and the other
party hasn’t, the minor, being in the position of the promisee, can enforce the contract.
● The minor can enter into the contract for necessities and when he has to perform in the
contract i.e. he can be a promisee and not a promisor. It is very clear that Mr.Aarav is
under a condition wherein he is ​required ​to fulfil his need to consume the vitamins which
help him in his day to day activities, therefore, making the medicines for Mr.Aarav a
“necessity” rather than a mere habit.
● The contract in this case has all essential factors of a valid contract and can be
enforceable by law.

Issue No. 2: Whether or not the company is liable to pay the compensation?
● Compensation refers to pecuniary remedy that is awarded to an individual who has
3
sustained an injury in order to replace the loss caused by said injury.
● Mr. Aarav Shah had become addicted to the Vitality- M capsules and because of
which his body could not function properly without its consumption.
● Initially when the price of one capsule was of Rs.40/- he bought 5 packs, each
consisting of 60 capsules; approximately costing him Rs. 12,000/-

2
​Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company​ [1892] ​EWCA Civ 1
3
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/compensation

11
 ● After bearing all this cost the prices of the capsules were further increased by the
Kadila Healthcare Ltd. from Rs.40/- to Rs.60/- therefore making it hard for Mr. Aarav
Shah to further continue his consumption.
● Also he took care of all the instructions that came along with the packaged medicines
as mentioned by the Kadila Healthcare Ltd.
● Therefore the company is liable to pay compensation to him as he took care of all the
instructions as a consumer.
● Aarav Shah consumed the capsules according to the instructions of the company
which constituted the acceptance and mere buying of the capsules constituted the
consideration.
● It has been well established that Mr.Aarav Shah consumed the product in accordance
to the guidelines prescribed by the company itself under the extant offer by the
company.
● Therefore, Kadila Healthcare Ltd. is liable to pay the compensation and other
expenses to Mr. Aarav Shah either as a consumer or a contracting party.

12
 PRAYER

In the light of the facts stated, issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited the council
prays that the honorable forum upholds the decision of the District Consumer Dispute Redressal
Forum and grant any other order/ relief which the Honorable commission deems to be fit.

13