DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 73 of 2021.

 

Shri Mithu Paul,

S/O. Shri Haridas Paul,

R/O. Subhashnagar, East Pratapgarh, 

P.O.-East Pratapgarh, Pin-799004,

P.S.-East Agartala, 

Dist.-West Tripura ….........................................................................Complainant.

 

 -VERSUS-

 

1. Future Retail Limited, 

Knowledge House, Shyam Nagar,

Off Jogeshwari- Vikhroli Link Road,

Jogeshwari(East), Mumbai-400060.

 

2. Big Bazar, Agartala Unit,

A Division of Future Retail Limited,

M.L. Plaza, Ground Floor, Mantribari Road,

Extension, Agartala,

P.O.Agartala, P.S.-West Agartala.  

Dist.-West Tripura, Pin-799001.................................................... Opposite parties.

To be represented by the Store Manager.

 

     __________PRESENT__________

 

 

 SRI RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

DR  (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

C O U N S E L

 

For the Complainant : Sri Sampad Choudhury,

Smt. Rinku Shil,

Advocates.

For the O.Ps.  : None-appeared. 

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON :   25/ 02/2022.

J U D G M E N T

          The Complainant Shri Mithu Paul, set the law in motion by presenting a petition U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 complaining deficiency of service by the O.P.

The Complainant's case, in brief, is that the Complainant purchased on 14/08/2021 some article i.e. one wearing apparel amounting to Rs.1,299/- from Big Bazar Shopping Mall, Agartala i.e. O.P. No.2. Thereafter he went to the bill counter for payment of the goods, the staff of the bill counter took carry bag from their own for the purpose of packing of those purchased articles without asking him in order to bring it in the complete deliverable state,so that its physical possession could be handed over to him. But surprisingly the staff of the cash counter told him to pay extra Rs.19/- for carry bag. Thereafter, he made contact with the Store Manager of the mall but from where also he did not get any proper response of extra charge for carry bag and he also enquired on what basis they charged for Rs.19/- for low quality carry bag and also asked them to provide him any circular regarding that issue but they did not pay any attention of his queries. He again went to the bill counter for rectification of bill and requested the staff of the cash counter to remove the extra charge of carry bag but surprisingly the staff of the cash counter loudly told him in front of the other customers of the mall that rectification of bill is not possible. As a result he had to suffer mental pressure, agony and faced harassment infront of the other customers which was unbearable to him. Hence, there is a clear deficiency in service on the part of O.P. No.2 namely “Big Bazar, Agartala Unit”. 

So, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the conduct of the O.Ps.,  the Complainant alleging deficiency of service has filed the instant complaint before this Commission for deficiency of service and  compensation for causing harassment, negligence, mental agony.

 2. On admission of the complaint notice was issued upon the O.P. But the O.P. after receiving the notice did not turn up and consequently the case was proceeded ex-parte against them vide order dated 24/11/2021. 

EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE COMPLAINANT:-

3. The Complainant examined himself as PW-I and submitted his examination in chief by way of affidavit. He has produced 03 documents comprising 3 sheets under  Firisti dated 17/08/2021. The documents on identification have been marked as Exhibit – 1 Series and M.O.-1. 

4.    POINTS TO BE DETERMINED:-

  On perusal of the Complainant and having regard to the evidence adduced by the Complainant, the following points are to be determined:

        (i). Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. towards the Complainant?

   (ii). Whether the complainant is entitled to get any compensation/ relief as prayed for?    

5.          ARGUMENTS OF BOTH SIDES :-          

      At the time time of argument Learned Counsel of the Complainant submitted that the O.P. charged Rs.19/- for a carry bag which was not purchased by the Complainant on 14/08/2021. At the time of purchasing some items of dress etc. from the shopping Mall of the O.Ps. extra Rs.19/- was charged for a carry bag which is an unfair trade practice. 

      Learned Counsel further submitted that there was a similar case and the judgment passed by this Commission in C.C.-46/2019 and the judgment was delivered on 25/09/2019 in favour of the Complainant. The O.P. preferred an appeal against the judgment before the Hon'ble State Commission and it was numbered as case No.A-1/2020 and the Hon'ble State Commission also affirmed the judgment of this District Commission. So the Complainant is entitled to get same treatment. The Complainant also relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and by that judgment 14 Revision Petitions were disposed of by a common judgment dated 22/12/2020. The Hon'ble National Commission also held that charging of additional cost for carry bag to carry the goods purchased by the consumer will be treated of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P.           

6.     DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:                                     

             Both the points are taken up together for the convenience.

         It is an ex-parte proceedings. We have to see whether the Complainant has been able to prove her complaint by way of adducing evidence. The Complainant filed affidavit-in- chief and also exhibited the cash memo including the bag. The Complainant in his examination-in-chief stated that on 14/08/2021 he visited the shopping mall of the O.P. No.2 for purchasing for one selected items of dress and he paid an amount of Rs.1,318/-(including extra Rs.19/-) for the said item. It found that the cashier had charged an additional amount of Rs.19/- for a carry bag without his consent. 

           Based on the above evidence we are of the opinion that there is an unfair trade practice on the part of the O.Ps. 

7.              In view of the discussion made above we found that the Complainant succeeded in establishing his case U/S. 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. We also found that O.P. No.2 “Big Bazar” located at M.L. Plaza, Ground Floor, Mantribari Road, Agartala was guilty of unfair trade practice. Accordingly, we order that the O.P. No.2  to refund the amount of Rs.19/- which was charged for a carry bag and also to pay Rs.2,000/- as a compensation for unfair trade practice adopted by them and also Rs.1,000/- as a cost of litigation i.e. in total of Rs.3,019/-(Rs.2,000/- + Rs.1,000/- + Rs.19/-). 

              The O.P. is directed to make the payment within 1 month from the date of this judgment and if the payment is not made within 1 month then it will carry interest @ 9% per annum till the payment is made in full.        

      Accordingly, the Complaint is allowed. The Complainant is directed to sent a certified copy of the judgment to the address of the O.Ps. by registered post within 7 days after receiving it for information of the O.Ps. and also for compliance. 

Supply a certified copy of the judgment to both the parties free of cost. 

 

      Announced.

 

 

 

SRI  RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

 

DR (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.