DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

PATIALA.

                                      Complaint No.    CC/15/210 of 24.9.2015

                                      Decided on:        21.4.2016

Umesh Kumar Ghai S/o Sh.Mohan Chand R/o H.No.52, Ajit Nagar, Near Punjab Rice Mill, Patiala Road, Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1.      Easy Day, Bharti Retail Ltd., Omaxe Mall,Mall Road, Patiala through its Manager.

2. Easy Day. Regd. Office Bharti Crescent, 1 Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, Phaswe II, New Delhi-110070, through its Director.

                                                                   …………….Ops

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act.

                                      QUORUM

                                      Sh. A.P.S.Rajput, President

                                      Smt.Neelam Gupta, Member

                                      Smt.Sonia Bansal,Member

Present:

For the complainant:   Sh.Puneet Jain , Advocate

For Ops:                       Sh.Dhiraj Puri,Advocate               

                                         ORDER

SONIA BANSAL,MEMBER

1. The complainant had purchased 11 items from Op no.1 on 28.5.2015 and one of the said items included the one Zen Chopping Board and Op no.1 charged Rs.128/- for the chopping board in the bill but when the complainant checked the product while coming back to his house, he was surprised to see that MRP of the product was printed as Rs.105/- only and thus Op no.1 charged Rs.23/- in excess of the MRP. At this, the complainant approached Op no.1 and disclosed about the aforesaid difference in the price qua the chopping board and unfair trade practice and requested it to refund the amount of Rs.23/- charged in excess but the concerned person of the Op refused the request straight  away.
2. It is averred by the complainant that he is a regular customer of the Easyday store and he purchases the goods worth Rs.5000/- to 6000/- per month from many years. In that way, it is alleged that in case there is a difference between the MRP and the price realized by  the Op in respect of the one item,  it is likelihood that there was the difference in the rate in the other items also.
3. The complainant feeling harassed and having experienced the mental agony on account of unfair trade practice, adopted by the Op approached this Forum through the present complaint brought under Section 12 of the  Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( for short the Act) for a direction to the Op to pay him Rs.3,50,000/- by way of compensation on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted by the Op, to pay him Rs.15000/- as cost of the complaint and further to pay him Rs.1,00,000/- on account of the harassment and the mental agony experienced by him, to pay him Rs.23/- on account of charging above the MRP.
4. On notice, Ops appeared through counsel and filed their reply to the complaint. It is an admitted  that the complainant had purchased 11 items from the store of Op no.1 on 28.5.2015 and out of 11 items, one item was chopping board for Rs.128/-whereas the price of the same was mentioned on the product as Rs.105/-. Ops have denied the fact that the complainant had ever approached Op no.1 and requested it to pay back the extra amount of Rs.23/- .It is further submitted that all the goods/items kept in the store are displayed on their counters and price of every product is systematically entered into the computers  and the computer picks universal product code (i.e. U.P.C.) which remains the same on all the MRPs of the product, whether it is new or old, as such, on that day the computer depicted Rs.128/- as the MRP of chopping board. As such no unfair trade practice can be attributed on the part of the Ops. All other allegations going against the Ops made by the complainant have been controverted and ultimately it was prayed to dismiss the complaint.
5. In support of his complaint, the complainant produced in evidence Ex.CA, his sworn affidavit alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C6 and his learned counsel closed the evidence.
6. On the other hand, on behalf of Ops, their learned counsel tendered in evidence Ex.OPA, the sworn affidavit of Sh. Devendra Singh, associate and closed the evidence.
7. The complainant filed the written arguments. We have examined the same, heard the learned counsel for the parties gone through the evidence on record.
8. Ex.C2 is the copy of retail invoice dated 28.5.2015 issued by Op no.1 regarding the sale of 11 items including chopping board for Rs.128/-, the total amount of the invoice being Rs.491 including Rs.2/- as the price of the carry bag. The complainant has also produced the photographs Exs.C3 to C6 in respect of chopping board, Ex.C3 being the photograph of the chopping board in question, wherein the price of the chopping board is mentioned as Rs.105/- which shows that the Op charged Rs.23/- more than the MRP of the product. A consumer has to be charged the price as printed on the product. Charging a consumer more than the MRP printed on the product amounts to unfair trade practice on its part.
9. Moreover, why a customer who has been regularly making the purchases from the store of the Ops would raise a dispute with them in respect of only one item from invoice Ex.C2. It is only because the complainant felt cheated in the matter of charging the price more than the MRP that he had to take up the matter firstly with the Op and when they failed to redress the remedy then to approach the Forum.
10. Not only the Ops adopted unfair trade practice, they have not realized their lapse before the Forum in any manner and have rather taken up the plea that the computer had automatically picked the price of Rs.128/- for the chopping board on that day but as we all know that a computer cannot pick price of any item unless and until it is fed into the computer by the Ops. Thus, the Ops practised an unfair trade practice in having sold the goods beyond the MRP.
11. Now a days easy day store has become very popular with the people and a large number of people go there especially on week-end  days. If one customer is being charged the amount of Rs.23/- over and above the MRP in respect of one product, we can understand the enormity of the unfair trade practice adopted by the Ops. Therefore, we treat the unfair trade practice a grave and serious matter affecting a large number of consumers and therefore, the compensation has to be awarded in proportionate to the gravity of the matter so as to make the Ops realize that they are bound to pay  for the mal practice adopted by them. We accordingly accept the complaint with a direction to the Ops to refund Rs.23/- charged in excess from the complainant and further to pay a sum of Rs.15000/-by way of punitive damages, out of which Rs.5000/-will be paid to the complainant and the same is inclusive of the costs of the complaint and the remaining Rs.10,000/-will be deposited in the consumer welfare fund of the Forum. Order be complied  by the Ops within 45 days on the  receipt of the certified copy of the order.

Pronounced

Dated:21.4.2016

               Sonia Bansal              Neelam Gupta                     A.P.S.Rajput

        Member                   Member                               President