DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 03 of 2020.

 

Shri Manojit Saha,

S/O. Shri Tapan Saha,

R/O.House No.02/243, 

Vill.Vivekananda Palli, 

P.O.-Amarpur, Pin-799101,

P.S.-Birganj, Dist.-Gomati Tripura

 

Present Address – 

C/O.-Kajal Paul,

Kamalghat, Mohanpur,

P.O.-Kamalghat, P.S.-Lefunga,

West Tripura, Pin-799210…................................................................Complainant.

 

 

-VERSUS-

 

 

“BAAZAR KOLKATA”,

Shop No.62/2, Central Road, 

Near Shib Bari Mandir, Agartala,

P.O.Agartala, P.S.-West Agartala.  

Dist.-West Tripura, Pin-799001....................................................... Opposite party.

 

 

     __________PRESENT__________

 

 

 SRI RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

 

DR  (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

For the Complainant : In person. 

 

 

For the O.P.  : Smt. Shilpi Chowdhuri,

  Advocate.  

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON :   25/ 08/2021.

 

J U D G M E N T

          The Complainant Shri Manojit Saha, set the law in motion by presenting the petition U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 complaining deficiency of service by the O.P.

The Complainant's case, in brief, is that the Complainant purchased some garments i.e. a Salwar Suit & two Pant(Half pant)  from “BAAZAR KOLKATA” Shopping Mall, Central Road, Near Shib Bari Mandir, Agartala on 13/11/2019 . Thereafter he went to the bill counter for payment of the garments and the staff of the bill counter took carry bag from their own for the purpose of packing of those purchased articles . But surprisingly the staff of the cash counter told him to pay extra Rs.3/- for carry bag which was not mentioned in the carry bag of “Baazar Kolkata”. Thereafter, he made contact with the “Baazar Kolkata” authority to provide carry bag free of cost, for the purchased items /articles from their shop.  But no response as a result he had to suffer mental pressure, agony and faced harassment infront of the other customers which was unbearable to him. 

So, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the conduct of the O.P.,  the Complainant alleging deficiency of service has filed the instant complaint before this Commission claiming Rs.45,000/-  as deficiency of service and as compensation for causing harassment, negligence, mental agony and Rs.3/- as cost of paper carry bag  from the O.P. along with 9% interest till the recovery for the end of justice.  

 2. On the other hand O.P. contested the case by filling written statement. 

In the written statement the O.P. submitted para-wise reply to the complaint in seriatim. Mostly, O.P. denied and disputed the averments made in the complaint.           

In the written statement it is also stated that none of the customers are forced to buy any carry bag. It is a routine procedure to restrict every kind of bag outside the mall for various security measures and a poster display above the cash counter displaying that “Bring Your own bag”. It is submitted that complaint is not maintainable in its present form and nature. 

EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE PARTIES:-

3. The Complainant examined himself as PW-I and submitted his examination in chief by way of affidavit. He has produced 02 documents. The documents on identification have been marked as Exhibit – 1 Series and M.O.-1. The Complainant was cross examined by the O.P. side. 

         On behalf of the O.P. one witness namely Sri Mantimay Das, S/O. Lt. Rabindra Nath Das, working for Asstt. Store Manager of O.P.  O.P. has produced 4 documents comprising 7 sheets under a Firisti dated 16/12/2020. The documents are namely Xerox copy of Voucher of mobile in the name of Baazar retail Ltd., Xerox copy of Printed copy of picture taken by mobile, Xerox copy of Employee Card No.02011 & Xerox copy of Aadhar Card of Sri Mantimay Das. On identification the documents are marked as Exhibit-A series. The O.P. was not cross examined by the Complainant side as it is a summary trial.   

4.    POINTS TO BE DETERMINED:-

  On perusal of the pleadings of both parties and having regard to the evidence adduced by the parties, the following points are to be determined:

       (i). Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. towards the Complainant?

        (ii). Whether the complainant is entitled to get any compensation/ relief as prayed for?    

5.          ARGUMENTS OF BOTH SIDES :-        

         On the date of argument the Complainant submitted written argument and we heard both sides arguments. 

         At the time of argument the Complainant submitted that there was a similar case and the judgment passed by this Commission in C.C.-46/2019 and the judgment was delivered on 25/09/2019 in favour of the Complainant. The O.P. preferred an appeal against the judgment before the Hon'ble State Commission and it was numbered as case No.A-1/2020 and the Hon'ble State Commission also affirmed the judgment of this District Commission. So the Complainant is entitled to get same treatment. The Complainant also relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and by that judgment 14 Revision Petitions were disposed of by common judgment dated 22/12/2020. The Hon'ble National Commission also held that charging of additional cost for carry bag to carry the goods purchased by the consumer will be treated of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P.   

       On the other hand Learned Counsel of the O.P. submitted that customers will have to bring their carry bag for shopping purpose and there is no law shown under which O.P. is required to give a shopping bag free of cost to its customers. Learned Counsel of the O.P. submitted to dismiss the complaint as devoid of merit.       

6.     DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:                                     

        Both issues are taken up together for the convenience.

        There is no dispute in respect of charging of Rs.3/- for a carry bag. From the exhibited documents i.e. the Cash Memo or Invoice, we find that the O.P. charged Rs.3/- for a carry bag. From the Examination-in-Chief submitted by one Sri Mantimay Das as a OPW-I, we find that customers are not forced to buy any carry bag and they were asked to bring their own bag.  It is also stated that the staff of bill counter took the carry bag from their own for the purpose of packing of this purchased articles without asking the Complainant. The Complainant in support of his complaint adduced examination-in-Chief on Affidavit and he has reiterated the alleged fact in his evidence. He further stated that he was forced to pay Rs.3/- extra for the carry bag.        

              We have perused the decision of the Hon'ble State Commission passed in case No.A-1 of 2020 (Big Bazaar Vs. Monojit Saha). The Hon'ble State Commission upheld the judgment passed by this Commission in a similar case where Rs.10/- was charged for a paper carry bag by the Big Bazaar shopping mall. Relying upon the above judgment we are in the opinion that the O.P. is guilty of committing deficiency in service by charging extra amount for the carry bag and it also amounts to unfair trade practice. 

7.            So, we hold that the Complainant has been able to prove his case U/S. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Accordingly, we give a direction to the O.P. to refund the amount of Rs.3/- which was charged for carry bag and also Rs.5,000/- as a compensation and Rs.3,000/- as a cost of litigation i.e. in total of Rs.8,003/-(Rs.5,000/- + Rs.3,000/- + Rs.3/-). 

              The O.P. is directed to make the payment within 1 month from the date of judgment, if the payment is not made within 1 month then it will carry interest @ 9% per annum till the payment is made in full.        

Supply a certified copy of the judgment to both the parties free of cost. 

 

    Announced.

 

SRI  RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

  DR  (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

 MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA