Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/550/2019

Inderjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited (Pantaloons Division) Pantaloons - Opp.Party(s)

Yugansh Siwach Adv.

06 Jan 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	550/ 2019
Date of Institution	:	17.06.2019
Date of Decision	:	06.01.2020

 

                                       

                                               

Inderjit Singh s/o Sh.Harbhajan Singh, K.No.238, Phase-I, Mohali.

                                ...  Complainant.

Versus

Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited (Pantaloons Division), Pantaloons, Elante Mall, Plot No.178 & 78-A, Phase-I, Industrial Area, Chandigarh, India-160002 through its Manager/Proprietor/Director Sh.Ashish Dikshit.

…. Opposite Party.

BEFORE:

SHRI RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

Argued by

                Sh.Yugansh Siwach, Adv. for the complainant

                Sh.Sourabh Gulia, Adv. for the OP.

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

1.         By dint of this common order, we propose to dispose of the following three (3) connected consumer complaints in which common questions of law and fact are involved:-

1	2	3	4
Sr. No.	C.C. No.	Complainant’s Name	Cost of Paper Carry Bag (in Rs.)
	550/2019	Inderjit Singh	5/-
	551/2019	Abhishek Siwach	5/-
	552/2019	Anish Narula	5/-

2.         The facts are gathered from Consumer Complaint No.550/2019- Inderjit Singh Vs.  Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Limited.
3.           The facts of the case as alleged by the complainant is that he  purchased a  pair of shoes worth Rs.499/- and went to the billing counter for payment and at the time of billing, the cashier told him that he was required to pay Rs.5/- on account of paper carry bag for carrying the articles.  It was alleged that in the entire shop premises it was nowhere mentioned that the OP would charge for a carry bag also.   It was also alleged that the consumers who were shopping from the store of the OP were not allowed to take any carry bag inside the store. He resisted and told the cashier that it was illegal to charge for a paper carry bag but to no effect.   It has further been averred that the Opposite Party has committed deficiency in service as also indulged into unfair trade practice by charging for the paper carry bag. Hence, the present consumer complaint.
4.         In its written statement, the OP while admitting the factual matrix of the case has pleaded that the amount for the carry bag was charged after getting the consent of the complainant.  It has further been pleaded that the names of the brand are not printed for any advertisement purposes and printed merely for information purpose which indicates that the products are purchased from a particular brand.  It has further been pleaded that the OP honoring the directions passed by the Forum in the case titled as C.C.No.438/2018 titled as Pankaj Chandgothia Vs. M/s Life Style International Pvt. Ltd., CC/64/2019 titled as Dinesh Parshad Raturi Vs. Bata India Ltd.” has stopped charging the carry bags and has stated providing free carry bags to all its customers forthwith who purchase articles from their shop. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service on its part, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.
5.         We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents on record.
6.          At the time of arguments, Ld. Counsel for Opposite Party has fairly conceded that the Opposite Party on learning through newspapers that charging of carry bags with its logo/name on it, has been held to be unfair trade practice by the Forum in CC/438/2018 – “Pankaj Chandgothia  Vs. Life Style International Pvt. Ltd.” decided on 03.01.2019 and CC/64/2019 – “Dinesh Parshad Raturi Vs. Bata India Ltd.” decided on 09.04.2019, has stopped charging for the carry bags. Since the OP has apologized for its mistake and stopped charging for the paper carry bags and has remorse and repentant on its mistake, therefore, we think that if somebody learnt a lesson then a lenient view should be taken qua that person. Keeping in view the same, we deem it proper not to impose any punitive costs upon the Opposite Party.
7.        In view of the above discussion, all the consumer complaints deserve to be accepted against the Opposite Party and the same are accordingly allowed qua it. The Opposite Party is directed:-
   1. to refund the cost of carry bag as mentioned at column No.4 of the above table to the respective complainant(s).
   2. to pay Rs.100/- to the respective complainant(s) towards compensation for harassment and mental agony.  Compensation imposed on lower side as mental agony of parting with the price of the carry bag could only be caused to this extent.
   3. to pay Rs.500/- as litigation expenses in each complaint.      
8.         This order shall be complied with by the Opposite Party within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall be liable to pay the amount at Sr.No.(i) to (iii) to each complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of the order, till its realization.
9.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

06.01.2020                                                             

Sd/-

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER