Citing the Bombay High Court order, Nestle also sought to recall an order of the NCDRC admitting the government\'s Rs 640 crore suit against the noodles manufacturer for alleged unfair trade practices and other charges.
Nestle India has said on Thursday that the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) had no jurisdiction to hear a class action suit filed in the Maggi noodles case by the government against the company.
According to Nestle, the apex consumer court should wait for test results of Maggi samples ordered by the Bombay High Court from three independent laboratories rather than order fresh sampling and more tests.
The company said that already 3,566 tests of the instant noodles had been conducted in India and abroad before and after the Bombay High Court's order that set aside a ban on the product and called for fresh testing.
The next hearing at the consumer court is on October 15.
The NCDRC had issued a notice to Nestle India on a plea filed by the government seeking further testing of Maggi noodles.
The food regulator banned the product nationwide after it was found to contain monosodium glutamate, a flavour enhancer, and excessive levels of lead. The company approached the Bombay High Court after the ban.
The counsel who appeared on behalf of Nestle argued that the samples kept with the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India could be tampered with and should not be considered for sampling. To this, the bench headed by Justice VK Jain remarked, "Do you mean to say that the government of India will inject lead into your noodles?"
The bench said the company, too, could tinker with samples.
Citing the Bombay High Court order, Nestle also sought to recall an order of the NCDRC admitting the government's Rs 640 crore suit against the noodles manufacturer for alleged unfair trade practices and other charges.
"The issues raised by the government here are the same as in Bombay High Court and so should not be allowed to be brought up in another forum again otherwise it will be a never ending thing and is contrary to the law," the counsel argued.
To this, the bench said that while the high court had set aside the ban, it never said that Maggi did not have excess lead.