Maggi’s legal tangle- Can Nestle redeem itself at NCDRC?

The popular 2-minute noodles brand has had more than its share of 15 minutes of fame, or rather, infamy. The ubiquitous Nestle Maggi ban story that has caught the nation’s attention for more than two months, saw two significant developments over the past week..Firstly, the Centre braced itself to launch a fresh attack against the food manufacturing giant by filing a complaint with the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission seeking damages. The Bombay High Court, on the other hand, granted a (minor) reprieve to Nestle by setting aside the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India’s (FSSAI) order banning Nestle’s Maggi brand of instant noodles. The detailed order of the high court, however, comes with a rider for the Swiss-based food giant..Bombay HC Vs. NCDRC- Advantage Nestle?.A Division Bench comprising Justice VM Kanade and Justice BP Colabawalla held that the FSSAI had “violated principles of natural justice” by passing the ban order without giving Nestle India an opportunity to present its case. Particularly when the Petitioner-Company, one day prior to passing of the said order, had issued a Press Release that it had recalled the product till the authorities were satisfied about its safety..The Bench had further gone on to say that while it ought not to be expected of the Court to examine the correctness of the expert reports (on lead content in the noodles), it could determine whether the testing was done as per provisions of the FSS Act. However, the crucial disclaimer (for Nestle) attached to the judgment was when the Court said;.“Though, we have allowed the Petition and set aside the impugned orders, we are still concerned about public health and public interest and therefore we are of the view that before allowing the Petitioner to manufacture and sell its product, Petitioner should send the 5 samples of each batch which are in their possession to three Food Laboratories accredited and recognized by NABL”.…If the results show that lead in these samples is within the permissible limit then the Petitioner would be permitted to start its manufacturing process. However, even newly manufactured products of all the other Variants be tested in these three laboratories and if level of lead in these newly manufactured products is also within the permissible limit then the Petitioner – Company may be permitted to sell its products.”.So while Maggi may not yet be out of the dock, the favorable observations made by the Bombay High Court could very well act as a clinching point for it when it faces a tougher battle in the Consumer Commission..Today in NCDRC.The matter, slated to come up in Court No 6 as Item 28 will be heard by Justice VK Jain and Dr. BC Gupta. It shall be an interesting fight between the Centre and Nestle because of the nature of allegations that the former has invoked against the latter..Apart from suing Nestle for a sum of Rs. 284.55 crore citing ‘serious violations under the Consumer Protection Act’, the Government has also claimed punitive damages to the tune of Rs. 355.40 crore. The complaint filed by lawyer Mrinalini Sen, a copy of which is with Bar & Bench, further goes on to say:.“The Department of Consumer Affairs is constrained to file the present complaint to safeguard the rights of consumers as set out in the Consumer Protection Act 1986, that have been violated by the Opponent Company (Nestle India Pvt Ltd.) by their unfair trade practices as well as defective and hazardous products, resulting in a class action which has caused injury to millions of consumers.”.With a scathing indictment of Nestle in the complaint, (describing it as a ‘large corporation with vast resources taking advantage of wary consumers’) the Government has not minced any words as it takes on the Swiss manufacturer in an unprecedented class action suit..Battleground: Court No. 6.Conspiracy theories aside, one pauses to wonder as to what is it about the issue that has got the government so riled up? The Bombay High Court held that although the government had been ‘shouting from the rooftops’ on how the ban of a contaminated product was in public interest, this ‘tall claim’ was not adequately substantiated..An averment such as this raises questions as to the true intent and purpose behind the episode. Whether Maggi is ruled to be contaminated beyond human consumption or not is something which the Commission would have to decide, but the issue has already begun to assume political overtones. How good that is for the brand and its fate in India will be determined today in the NCDRC. As of now, all eyes rest on Justice Jain’s court.