Punjab

Rupnagar

CC/19/113

Dharampal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Future Retail Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Harish Kumar, Adv.

11 Dec 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTT. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ROPAR

                                 Consumer Complaint No.  113 of 29.08.2019

                                 Date of decision                    :    11.12.2019

 

Dharam Pal son of Sh. Dasondhi Ram, resident of House No.4, Gali No.3, Piara Singh Colony, Rupnagar, Tehsil & District Rupnagar

                                                                 ......Complainant

                                             Versus

1. Future Retail Limited, New Delhi, through its Store Manager, Easy Day Club, College Road, Rupnagar
2. Easy Day Club College Road, infront of HDFC Bank, Rupnagar through is Store Manager

   ....Opposite Parties

                                   Complaint under Section 12 of the                                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM

 

                        SH. KARNAIL SINGH AHHI, PRESIDENT

                        CAPT. YUVINDER SINGH MATTA, MEMBER

ARGUED BY

 

Sh. Harish Kumar, Adv. counsel for complainant  

O.Ps. exparte 

                                           ORDER

              SH. KARNAIL SINGH AHHI, PRESIDENT

1.         Complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.500/- retained at the time of enrolment of the complainant as member, the excess charged of the juice bottle in the name of scheme; to pay Rs.30,000/- as compensation; pay Rs.10,000/- to the complainant; any other relief which this Hon'ble Forum may deem fit and appropriate in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice. 

2.    Brief facts made out from the complaint are that that in June/July 2019, the O.P. floated a scheme for becoming member of its Store to be opened under the name and style Easyday Club on college road, Rupnagar by paying a sum of Rs.1000/-. An item of Rs.500/- to be given at the time of becoming a member and Rs.500/- to be adjusted in future five months adjusting Rs.100/- every month on first purchase and giving discount/rebate of 10% on each purchase irrespective of number of purchase made by a member. On the assurance of O.Ps, the complainant opted for becoming member of easy day club in the 2^nd week of July and paid Rs.1000/- . The store of the O.P. gave a Cooker to the complainant of Rs.500/- and issued a membership card to be used at the time of every purchase for availing 10% rebate and getting refund of Rs.100/- every month of the remaining Rs.500/- for a period of five months. The complainant purchased the items from O.P. No.2 in the month of August 2019 and asked to adjust Rs.100/- as promised at the time of issuing membership card, the official of the O.P. demanded phone which was not with the complainant at that time. On the next purchase, the complainant took the phone with him and after purchase, at the counter submitted the membership card and also asked to adjust Rs.100/-, the official of the O.P. demanded phone from the complainant which the complainant gave, but after seeing the future app in the mobile of the complainant remarked that there is zero balance in the card of the complainant, so the complainant inquired where his Rs.500/- had gone. The counter clerk called the Manager who also tried for some time with the phone of the complainant and remarked that the amount of the complainant has lapsed and there is zero balance in his account. The O.Ps. had adopted unfair trade practices and allure the buyer under the pretext of 10% rebate and other schemes whereas in fact on the item exaggerated price is being shown by the O.Ps. and amount held by O.P. as a trustee is being forfeited without any reason and also not giving the rebate though promised to be paid in future. Hence, this complaint.   

3.    On being put to notice, none appeared on behalf of O.Ps., accordingly, they were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 11.12.2019. 

4.    On being called upon to do so, the complainant has tendered copy of sworn affidavit Ex.C1, along with documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C4 and closed the evidence.

5.    We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record of the file, carefully.

6.    Complainant counsel Sh. Harish Kumar made prayer that in the month of June/July, O.Ps. floated the scheme of depositing Rs.1000/- with the observations that initially the complainant is to purchase the item of Rs.500/- and then remaining amount of Rs.500/- will be adjusted in further five months with benefits of 10% discount. The complainant as per the scheme deposited the amount and purchased the item but for the subsequent amount did not adjust of Rs.100/- per month into his account and did not extended the benefit of 10%. He prayed that despite notice, O.Ps. did not appear and complainant version is un-rebutted. He also made prayer that the item is purchased vide Ex.C2 from the Provisional Store of More and vide Ex.C3 from the Provisional Store of Easy Day on different dates. The MRP mentioned in both the Provisional Store is equal and O.Ps. Easy Day has played fraud of giving benefit buy one get one free (2). This is all because of the MRP. Lastly prayed to allow the complaint with cost.

7.    Complainant is resident of District Rupnagar, O.Ps. is also having the office/Provisional Store in this District. Despite notice, none appeared on behalf of O.Ps. Ex.C2 & Ex.C3 proves the purchase of item from the two different Provisional Stores. In this way, it is held that this forum has the territorial jurisdiction and the complaint is maintainable. '

8.    Coming to the point of relief, it is pleaded by the complainant that in the month of June/July, scheme was floated by paying a sum of Rs.1000/- and at the same time, the complainant has to purchase the item of worth Rs.500/- which he purchased and the remaining amount of Rs.500/- was to be adjusted in subsequent purchase item with benefit of 10% discount. It was also agreed for O.P. will credit Rs.100/- monthly for the coming five months into the account of the complainant. In support of this conditions, complainant tendered an affidavit which is written by the complaint. On filing the complaint, notice was issued to the O.Ps. and despite notice none appeared as stated by the complainant counsel now nothing is due payable by the O.Ps. into his account of complainant on the ground that due to the lapse of period of five months Rs.500/- had lapsed. But to rebut this version, O.Ps. did not appear.

9.    After appreciating the conditions of complainant and relying upon the documentary evidence of Ex.C2 & Ex.C3, no relief can be granted to the complainant on the basis of MRP difference between the Provisional Store of More or Provisional Store of Easy Day. That request stands declined. However, as per the scheme, the complainant deposited Rs.1000/- then adjusted against the purchase of Rs.500/- and the remaining amount Rs.500/- qua which there is no explanation on the file on behalf of O.Ps. Evidence is unrebutted. So the complainant is successfully in proving the deficiency on the part of O.Ps. Hence, the complaint is ordered to be allowed partly.

10.  In the light of discussions made above, the complaint stands allowed partly with the directions to the O.Ps. to pay Rs.500/- to the complainant with cost of litigation of Rs.500/- total Rs.1000/- within the period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 

10.  The certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties forthwith, free of costs, as permissible under the rules and the file be indexed and consigned to Record Room.          

 

            ANNOUNCED                                    (KARNAIL SINGH AHHI)

            Dated.11.12.2019                           PRESIDENT
 

 

 

                                      (CAPT. YUVINDER SINGH MATTA)

                                                          MEMBER