BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 28,SENGUNTHAPURAM 1^ST STREET, TIRUPPUR-641 604.

PRESENT:   TMT.S.DEEPA, B.Sc., B.L.,                          - PRESIDENT

                   THIRU.S.BASKAR, B.L.,                                      - MEMBER-I

                   THIRU.V.RAJENDRAN, M.A., B.L.,             - MEMBER-II

CC.NO. 50/2019

WEDNESDAY THE  26^th DAY OF OCTOBER 2022

                                                         Date of Complaint filed: 20.12.2019

                                                       Date of Order pronounced: 26.10.2022

S. Murali Mohan

S/o. Late. N. Subramaniam,

102, Kaliamman Kovil Street,

Bharathi Nagar, 15-Velampalayam,

Tiruppur North Taluk, Tiruppur District                             ... Complainant

       //Vs//

BIG BAZZAR, (A group of Future Retail)

Rep by its Manager,

Near M.G.B. Show room,

Valarmathi Bus Stop,

Municipal Office Road,

Tiruppur – 641 604.                                                        .... Opposite Party

          Counsel for Complainant              : Mr. S. Aristatle Sivam,  Advocate

          Counsel for opposite party             : Party in Person

          The Petition having come for final hearing before this Commission, memo filed on behalf of the complainant stating that the written argument to be treated as oral argument, which was recorded. Hence on perusing of the materials on records, this Commission passed the following:-

ORDER

TMT.S.DEEPA, B.Sc., B.L., - PRESIDENT

          1. This is the complaint filed by the Complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to direct the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.995/- and the Tax amount collected for the said Rs.995/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. from 22.10.2019 till date towards refund of the undelivered 10 sets of sweet boxes and to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/-for deficiency in services and to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony/harassment and to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- towards cost of this complaint and any other suitable orders.  

2. The case of complaint:

              On 22.10.2019 the complainant have placed an order of 50 sets of Soanpapdi and 50 sets of Laddu totally 110 sets of sweet boxes and paid full amount for the same in advance to the opposite party through South Indian Bank, Palladam Branch Debit Card. When the complainant visited the opposite party’s store to take delivery of order placed  110 sets of sweet boxes the complainant found shortage of 10 sets of sweet boxes. When the complainant informed about the said shortage of 10 sets sweet boxes, the opposite party simply replied that they have sold 10 sets of those sweet boxes to a third party as they demanded it and asked the complainant to buy other category of sweet boxes by paying additional amount.

          That the sweet boxes purchased is only to give to complainant’s friends, clients and staffs at the time of Deepavali festival. If the complainant give one kind of sweet box to one party and another kind of sweet box to others. It will create partiality among them and the complainant will loose his clients due to which not only his income will be affected but also the complainants reputation will be damaged. When the complainant asked the opposite party to confirm with their other branches whether the same stock is available or not, the opposite party refused to do so. Further, on 23.10.2019 when the complainant asked the opposite party to deliver the order placed sweet boxes to the complainant’s office address which is situated very near to the opposite party’s store, the opposite party replied that as it is a festival season and the store was crowded so door delivery will be possible only after festival. Hence, the complainant took delivery through his son M.Manoj Kumar. At the time of delivery of 100 sets of sweet boxes the opposite party gave 4 Nos of carry bags to carry the said sweet boxes and charged price for it. The complainant was never told that he would be charged for 4 bags. Charging for carry bags also deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

          The complainant issued a legal notice to the respondent on 15.11.2019 demanding to refund the amount for the undelivered 10 sets of sweet boxes paid to the respondent and also demanding Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for causing complainant great loss and damage besides mental tesion, trauma and inconvenience and loss of value of money and respects within one week of receipt of this notice. The respondent received the said legal notice and issued a reply notice on 26.11.2019 with false and untenable grounds. The opposite party had agreed to make refund of the amount for undelivered 10 sets of sweet boxes and accepted their mistake on their part but denied to give tax amount deducted for the amount of Rs.995/- and compensation amount as demanded in the legal notice.

          The opposite parties are not only guilty of deficiency in services by charging money for carry bags and for not supplying order placed sweet boxes after receiving total amount and their promises in due course of their services towards their helpless complainant but also for mental torture and harassment to the complainant by not delivering part quantity from the ordered quantity of sweet boxes and unnecessarily misguiding and delaying the refund of advance amount of Rs.995/- along with interest and deducted tax amount for Rs.995/-.

          Hence the complaint is filed under section 12, the complainant praying to direct to direct the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.995/- and the Tax amount collected for the said Rs.995/- along with interest @ 18% p.a. from 22.10.2019 till date towards refund of the undelivered 10 sets of sweet boxes and to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/-for deficiency in services and to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony/harassment and to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- towards cost of this complaint and any other suitable orders.       

3. The Points for consideration are:-

1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite
2.  
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?
3. Whether any cost may be allowed?

4.  In this case, the complainant has filed his proof affidavit on  23.02.2021 and had marked documents Ex.A-1 to A-4 on 23.08.2022 and also filed written argument on 13.10.2022. The opposite party have filed their written version on 20.02.2020. But they have failed to file their proof affidavit and arguments on their behalf.

POINT No.1:-

       5. It is the case of the complainant that he had approach the opposite party for the purchase of  110 boxes of sweets, for distributing to friends and relatives for Diwali. He had also made payment for the same. The next day when he went to get delivery of the sweet boxes, he was delivered only 100 boxes and was informed that the other 10 boxes have been sold to other customers and if he wanted he could be given some alternate sweet boxes. The complainant refused to get the other type of sweets as he wanted to give all his friends and relatives the same kind of sweets, as it would lead to controversies among them. Moreover he was billed for the bags for carrying the sweet boxes. It is the contention of the complainant that it is the duty of the opposite party to provide bags free of cost to carry the sweets, hence making the complainant pay for them has caused mental agony to the complainant.

          The complainant has marked document Ex A1- A4 on his behalf. Ex A1 being the Tax Invoice and bill for the purchase dated 24.10.2019. Ex A2 is the legal notice sent to the opposite party. Ex A4 is the reply notice of the  opposite party dated 26.11.2018. According to Ex A4 the opposite party on their behalf state that the unavailability of the extra 10 boxes was informed to the complainant, but while the billing they had received the amount for 110 boxes. They have also admitted that due to lack of communication between the case counter and the sales representative, the mistake had been committed by them. As the packaging had already been done before the complainant approached them for delivery the package was delivered without checking the invoice. It is also admitted that the same was unintentional and the mistake was due to lag in communication between their employees. They have also apologized for the same and requested the complainant to get back the refund of  the extra money charged by them for Rs.995/-. They also give option to choose some other sweet, which was not accepted by the complainant.

                   Regarding the carry bag they have stated that the bags are just like any other product in the store offered to its customers for purchase on payment of cost. There is no compulsion to buy them from their store for carrying the goods purchased. The customer have absolute discretion to buy the bag or make any other arrangements. Moreover they have also displayed notice regarding the carry bags informing the following things in their store;

          “Dear Customers,

1. We encourage you to bring your own carry bags.
2. In case you don’t bring a carry bag, it can be made available at our store on chargeable basis.
3. Purchase of a carry bag is an option gives to you and not a compulsion.
4. In case you are forced to purchase the carry bag at the counter, you may please bring it to the notice of Store Manager
5. As a responsible business house we make sincere efforts to reduce the usage of paper carry bags since it is detrimental to environment. We encourage you to refuse the carry bags.
6. We believe that it is our joint responsibility to ensure that the environment is protected for reservation and future generation.”

Hence they contend that there is no compulsion to buy the bags from their stores.

         The complainant has relied his arguments for the right of the customer to be provided the bags by the opposite party based on the order passed by The State Consumer Forum, Chandigarh where the Forum had directed The Big Bazaar Store at Industrial Area, Phase 1 to pay Rs.23,000/-in two separate cases for charging Rs.18 from tow customers for a carry bag. The store has to pay Rs.1500 each to the two complainants and deposit Rs.20,000/- in the “Consumer Legal Aid Account”. After hearing the arguments, the forum said, “…..it would have been very odd and inconvenient for the complainant to carry the new articles in hand throughout, without a carry bag. In this backdrop, charges of such things (Cloth bags) cannot be separately foisted upon the consumers and would amount to overcharging……”

          “…….the complainant and other gullible consumers like him has certainly been taken for a ride by the opposite party. Undoubtedly, the opposite party (Big Bazaar) has several stores across the country and made a lot of money. Thus, the act of the opposite party, by forcing the gullible consumers to pay additionally for the carry bags, surely and certainly amounts to deficiency in service”.

          This Commission comes to the conclusion that negligence and deficiency in service has been committed by the opposite party as admitted by them in their reply notice Ex A4. Hence they are liable to compensate their consumer who is the complainant herein for their unfair trade practice and negligence. Hence point no.1 is answered accordingly.

Point No. 2 & 3:-

6. They are also liable to refund the amount paid by the complainant for the undelivered sweet boxes i.e, Rs.995/-. Though the opposite party have stated their stand to not providing carry bags to carry the goods purchased from their store, and it is the free will of the customers to buy the carry bags, the complainant was not asked or informed whether the carry bags came for a price or were provided free of cost. Without informing him about the same, they have been added to the bill and the amount has been received from the complainant. These acts of the opposite party have indeed caused much mental agony and suffering to the complainant. Hence the complainant has to be compensated for the same and also for the cost of the complaint. Hence point no. 2 & 3 are answered accordingly.

              In the result, the complaint is allowed and direct the opposite party to repay the amount of  Rs.995/-(Rupees Nine Hundred and Ninety Five only) and to pay an amount of Rs.7,500/- (Rupees Seven Thousand and Five Hundred only) for compensation towards mental agony and the cost of the complaint within three months of this order.

               Failing which the amount of Rs.7,500/- (Rupees Seven Thousand and Five Hundred only) shall also carry an interest of 8% from the date of this order till its realization.

                    Dictated by me, and transcribed by Steno-typist and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me, on this 26^th day of October 2022.                  

      Sd/-                                               Sd/-                                          Sd/-

MEMBER I                                MEMBER II                               PRESIDENT

  EXHIBITS ON THE SIDE OF COMPLAINANT:-

LIST OF DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY : NIL

        Sd/-                                        Sd/-                                          Sd/-

MEMBER  I                              MEMBER II                              PRESIDENT