DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, LUCKNOW

CASE No.839 of 2011

       Sri Ishwar Bhagwani,

       S/o Late Sri Hira Lal Bhagwani ,

       R/o Sector-2/C-34, Flat No.102,

       Nandani Apartment, Vikas Nagar,

       Lucknow.

                                                                    ……Complainant

Versus

                 Big Bazar (Future Value Retail Ltd.),

                Sahara Mall, Saharaganj, Hazratganj,

                Lucknow-226001.

                                                                                                                                                                                         .......Opp. Parties

Present:-

Sri Vijai Varma, President.

Smt. Anju Awasthy, Member.

JUDGMENT

This complaint has been filed by the Complainant against the OP for payment of excess amount of Rs.4.00 with 18% interest, compensation of  Rs.25,000.00 and cost of suit of Rs.5,000.00.

          The case in brief of the Complainant is that on 15.08.2011 the Complainant went to the retail store of OP and purchased goods worth Rs.2,067.00. Amongst the various consumables, the Complainant had also purchased Tata Tea Agni of 1kg pack of Rs.184.00. After the purchase, the Complainant was shocked to see that the price printed on the packet containing Tata Tea Agni was only Rs.184.00 but the OP had charged Rs.188.00 from the Complainant, hence immediately the Complainant demanded refund of excess amount of Rs.4.00. The Complainant also informed the OP that charging of the price in excess of the price displayed on the packet constitute unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act but the OP did not relent and informed the Complainant that they were not afraid of Consumer Forum and they have no power to change the price of goods as feeded in

-2-

the software of Big Bazar. In this way the OP looted and robbed thousands of customers on the day of Independence Day by taking benefit of the fact that very few customers had ever thought that the OP could charge excessive price. The OP is guilty of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service, hence this complaint.

          The OP has filed the WS wherein it is mainly submitted that the grievances made in the complaint mainly revolves around the electronic/system error (Computer error) for which offer of refund was given to the Complainant but he refused to accept it. Before the Complainant could bring into notice, the system generated error was already detected by the Companies’ software and immediately action was taken and data system corrected. The Complainant was contacted and was offered refund and also a gift voucher of Rs.1,000.00 as a goodwill gesture of thanks accorded to him but the Complainant refused to accept it. There has been no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice or negligence on the part of the OP. The Complainant was not interested in getting the issue resolved, rather he intended to prolong and complicate the issue in order to make some wrongful gains from the OP. He is more interested in exploring the possibilities of as to what can be done in the given circumstances so that the same could earn him unlawful gains. The Complainant was neither willing to come to the OP store nor facilitated OP to approach him. Hence, neither the refund cheque and nor the gift voucher could be delivered to him. The Complainant is not entitled to any cost as claimed by him. The complaint deserves to be dismissed with heavy cost.

          The Complainant has filed his affidavit and 2 papers with the complaint. The OP has filed the affidavit of Sri Rajneesh Kumar Srivastava, Cluster Manager and Sri Ashish Dubey, Store Manager, Big Bazar.

          Heard Counsel for both the parties and perused the entire record.

-3-

          In this case, it is not disputed that the Complainant had to pay Rs.188.00 for purchasing a pack of Tata Tea Agni from the OP whereas the price printed on the pack was only Rs.184.00 inclusive of all taxes, therefore the OP had charged Rs.4.00 extra from the Complainant. The disputed point according to the OP is that it was a technical/system error and that they offered refund to the Complainant but the Complainant had refused to accept it or the Complainant when asked the OP to refund Rs.4.00 charged by them in excess of the price printed on the packet then the OP refused to do so saying that they had no power to change the price of goods as fed in the software of Big Bazar and therefore the OP had committed unfair trade practice and also deficiency in service.

          Even though the OP has not disputed the excess payment made by the Complainant with regard to Tata Tea Agni pack of OP the Complainant has filed the photocopy of the price printed on the pack in question and also a photocopy of the price paid by him to the OP regarding the pack in question. The MRP on the pack shows the cost of the article in question to be Rs.184.00 whereas the Complainant was made to pay Rs.188.00 for pack in question, therefore there is clear cut excess charge of Rs.4.00 by the OP. The contention of the Complainant is that when he asked the OP to refund the amount then they refused to do so on the ground that this could not be done as the price of the goods was fed in the software of Big Bazar. The OP has admitted that the error was there in the electronic/system which means the software was fed with the price of Rs.188.00 only. The OP has taken the stand that the Complainant was contacted and was offered refund at the place of his convenience and a gift voucher of Rs.1,000.00 as a good will gesture but there is nothing documentary to show that the OP offered to refund the amount then and there to the Complainant when the payment was made by the Complainant at the time of the purchase. Besides, it also shows that the, as

-4-

the system was fed with the price of Rs.188.00 instead of Rs.184.00, therefore any customer making a purchase of the pack in question was duped of Rs.4.00 on that date and thus there could be huge amount of unlawful gains through the excessive pricing. It is not clear as to what did the OP do in refunding the amount of Rs.4.00 to all the customers who had purchased that pack on that date till the correction was made in the system. We also fail to understand as to when the Complainant raised the issue with the OP for the refund of the amount at the time of purchase, then why his problem was not addressed to and why the OP immediately did not check the system and correct it. Therefore, on the basis of evidence on record, it is absolutely clear that the OP had committed gross unfair trade practice as deficiency in service in charging more amount then what is printed on the pack and also did not correct the problem immediately, to the loss of the Complainant personally and also to a number of consumers who might have purchased the pack in question from the stores of the OP in operation in selling out the product on that particular date. Therefore, the Complainant is not only entitled to get the refund of Rs.4.00 with interest but also to get adequate compensation as also cost of the litigation.

          As is obvious that because of the wrong information fed in the system of the OP a number of consumers may have been duped and might have paid excess amount to the OP who though have not come forward to the Forum for refund of the money but considering such number of consumers who are not identifiable it is very essential to slap compensation including refund of money for such consumers who might make the claim subsequently and therefore under 14 (1) (h) (b) the OP is directed to make payment of Rs.50,000.00 as compensation and this amount shall be paid by the OP to be credited in the a/c of the Forum to be utilised as per the rules or directions to be issued at the time of making of claims by such customers

-5-

who might have been duped on that date of purchase of articles in question.

ORDER

          The complaint is partly allowed. The OP is directed to refund the amount of Rs.4.00 (Rupees Four Only) with 9% interest from the date of filing of the case till the final payment is made to the complainant.

The OP is also directed to pay Rs.5,000.00 (Rupees Five Thousand only) as compensation and Rs.3,000.00 (Rupees Three Thousand only) as cost of the litigation. The compliance of the order is to be made within a month.

          The OP is also directed to make payment of Rs.50,000.00 as compensation to be credited in the a/c of the Forum to be utilised as per the rules or directions to be issued at the time of making of claims by such customers who might have been duped on that date of purchase of articles in question.

          If the compliance of the order is not made within a month then the OP will have to pay 9% interest on the entire amount due.

          (Anju Awasthy)                                (Vijai Varma)

                 Member                                                  President

Dated:         May, 2015