Order dictated by:
Sh.Anoop Sharma, Presiding Member
- Ravinder Singh complainant has filed the present complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act on the allegations that opposite party is retailer of Computers & computer’s part. The complainant purchased one LED Computer Monitor and keyboard kot of Brand name “PUNTA” on 21.6.2016 vide bill No. 9708 of Rs. 4980/-. Opposite party inspite of having price tag of keyboard kit Rs. 449/- (inclusive of all taxes) has charged Rs. 490/- for keyboard kit . The complainant made strong protest to opposite party that the price tag display price inclusive of all taxes and charging of taxes on the said product is against the provision of law. But opposite party did not care to listen the genuine request of the complainant and insisted on charging the same. The complainant has prayed for the following reliefs vide instant complaint:-
- Opposite party be directed to immediately refund Rs. 41/- charged excess as tax from the complainant.
- Opposite party be also directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 10000/- on account of mental sufferings, harassment and humiliation suffered by the complainant besides litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 5000/- may also be awarded to the complainant.
Hence, this complaint.
- On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version taking certain preliminary objections therein interalia that the present complaint is not maintainable as the same has been filed only to harass the opposite party ; that the present case has been filed merely to misuse the provisions of law and is liable to be dismissed. On merits, it was submitted that the complainant purchased full computer from opposite party i.e. CPU, LED and one Keyboard mark PUNTA. Opposite party issued two bills one of CPU and the other of Keyboard and LED. The keyboard was sold to the complainant after giving his concession on the print in actual i.e. Rs 699/-. But after two days complainant approached the opposite party and told that he had confirmed the price of same keyboard of PUNTA company and had purchased from some other shop and its print is very less i.e. Rs. 449/-. The opposite party told the complainant that it was a Chinese kit and the keyboard given to the complainant was of superior quality. But the complainant was not ready to understand and insisted the opposite party to refund his amount of keyboard. It was denied that the complainant made strong protest that the opposite party is charging excess price than price tag. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. In his bid to prove the case complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 , copy of bill dated 21.6.2016 Ex.C-2, copy of price tag Ex.C-3 and closed his evidence .
4. To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh.Gagandeep Singh tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.OP1, copy of bill dated 21.6.2016 Ex.OP2, copy of bill dated 21.6.2016 Ex.OP3, copy of cover of keyboard Ex.OP4, copy of price tag Ex.OP5 and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite party.
5. We have heard the complainant in person as well as ld.counsdel for the opposite party and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
6. On the basis of the evidence produced on record by the complainant, it is proved that the complainant purchased one LED Computer monitor for Rs. 4490/- and keyboard kit of Brand name “PUNTA” Rs. 490/- in all Rs. 4980/- vide bill dated 21.6.2016. Copy of bill accounts for Ex. C-2 on record. As per price tag MRP was Rs. 449/- inclusive of all taxes. Copy of price tag is Ex.C-3 on record. However, opposite party charged Rs. 490/- instead of Rs. 449/-. In this way opposite party over charged Rs.41/- over and above the price tag of the keyboard. As such it is evident that the opposite party has charged Rs. 41/- in excess from the price of the keyboard in dispute which amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party.
7. However, the plea taken by the opposite party in the written version that the keyboard was sold to the complainant after giving him concession on the print in actual i.e. Rs. 699/- is not believable as the opposite party itself has produced on record copy of bill No. 9708 dated 21.6.2016 vide which it was proved that the keyboard was sold at the price of Rs. 490/- only. The other documents produced by the opposite party i.e. Ex.OP4 and Ex.OP5 only show the brand name of the keyboard i.e. PUNTA.
8. From the above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the opposite party has charged Rs.490/- as the price of the keyboard instead of Rs.449/- ( inclusive of all taxes) dispute which amounts to unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party. In this way opposite party charged Rs.41/- in excess as per price tag of the keyboard. As such complainant is entitled to Rs. 41/- charged in excess from the complainant. As the complainant has suffered harassment in the hands of the opposite party, as such opposite party is directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 2000/- to the complainant. Cost of litigation is assessed at Rs.1000/-. Compliance of this order be made within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order ; failing which, complainant shall be at liberty to get the order enforced through the indulgence of this Forum .Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 11.1.2017
/R/
