DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.

                                                                                          Case No.315/2014

Mr. Ronen Chatterjee

S/o Dr. Bhaskar Chatterjee

R/o 3 Vasant Marg,

Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057                               ….Complainant

Versus

Essex  Farms Pvt. Ltd.

4, Aurobindo Marg,

New Delhi-110016                                                ……Opposite Party

                                                          Date of Institution          :  14.08.14                                        Date of Order        :   23.01.17

Coram:

Sh. N.K. Goel, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

O R D E R

Complainant’ case, in short, is that on 11.12.13 he visited the OP outlet to purchase diet coke and lays chips. The representative /employee of the OP asked him to pay Rs.40/- for diet coke and Rs.20/- for lays chips whereas the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) mentioned on diet coke was Rs.25/- and lays chips Rs.15/-. He pointed out and requested the employees of the OP not to charge excess amount beyond MRP mentioned on the products, but they started undue argument with him and refused to sell the said products at MRP. Since he was in need of the products he paid the amount as asked by them with under. He asked them to issue cash memo for the said purchase but they refused to do so but he had recorded the conversation in his mobile. It is submitted that the OP was misappropriating and exploiting the general public by charging extra charge and beyond the MRP mentioned in the products.  Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of OP the Complainant has filed the present complaint to direct the OP to refund the sum of Rs.20/- alongwith 18% interest per annum, to pay a sum of Rs.2 lacs towards the physical strain and mental agony and Rs.20,000/- towards cost of this petition.     

OP in the written statement has inter-alia categorically denied that the representatives/or employees of the OP ever demanded the more money/asked customer to pay more than the Maximum Retail Price. It is categorically denied that the Complainant had pointed out and requested the representatives/employees of the OP not to charge excess amount beyond MRP mentioned on the products but they started undue arguments with the Complainant and refused to sell the said products at MRP. It is also denied that the Complainant was in need of the product and hence he paid them the amount as asked by them with protest. It is submitted that the entire narration by the Complainant is nothing but a concocted story. It is also denied that the Complainant had asked the employees of the OP to issue the cash memo for the said products but they refused to do so. It is submitted that when no incident ever happened, there is no question of recording of conversation with the representatives/employees of the OP in his phone. It is stated that had any such incident taken place on 11.12.13, the Complainant should have brought the same immediately to the notice of the management of OP. Denying any deficiency in service on its part OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

Complainant has filed a rejoinder wherein he has reiterated the facts of the complaint.

Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence while affidavit of Sh. Ashish Goyle, Director has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.

Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the Complainant.

We have heard the arguments on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the file very carefully.

According to the Complainant, on 11.12.13 he visited the OP outlet to purchase diet coke and lays chips. The representative /employee of the OP asked him to pay Rs.40/- for diet coke and Rs.20/- for lays chips whereas the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) mentioned on diet coke was Rs.25/- and lays chips Rs.15/-. As per the Complainant OP’s representative/employee refused to give the cash memo.  Photograph Ex. CW1/A corroborates this fact the OP has placed on record copies of two cash memo s dated 11.12.13 (Ex. DW1/2) of some other consumer wherein the price of coke can be has been shown as Rs.25/-.  The Complainant has filed the alleged audio recording cassette. The mere filing of the audio cassette in absence of any authenticity is liable to be discarded. If the complainant had purchased the above stated two items from the OP on higher rates, he should have immediately made a complaint to the OP’s management to solve out the problem. But he did not do so. When the price of coke can from two other customers on 11.12.13 had been charged/sold at Rs.25/- we de not see any reason to believe the complainant that the OP had charged Rs.40/- from the complainant same and Rs.20/- for chips from him.  Therefore, the Complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of OP.  Accordingly, we dismiss the complaint with no order as to costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 23.01.2017