Order dictated by:

Sh.Anoop Sharma,Presiding Member

1.       Radhika Chopra complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that opposite party is retail outlet of readymade garments and the complainant purchased one jacket on 22.1.2017 vide invoice   No.0026888 of Rs. 2624/-. Due to sale promotion scheme opposite party sold this item on 50% discount on price . As per price tag, MRP was 2499/- inclusive of all taxes. But opposite party despite having price tag inclusive of all taxes has charged 6.05% (75.59 paise) tax on the purchased item. The complainant made strong protest to opposite party that price tag display price inclusive of all taxes and charging of taxes on the said product was against the provisions of law. But the opposite party did not care and insisted of charging the same. The complainant has suffered great hardship and it tantamount to gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party. Opposite party is entitled to charge Rs. 1249.50 paise for jacket after 50%  discount on Rs. 2499/-. But the opposite party illegally charged Rs. 75.59 paise as VAT on discounted price of Rs. 1249.50 paise The complainant is a consumer qua the opposite party for due consideration and opposite party is deficient in rendering services, as such complainant is entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Forum as defined  under section  2(g)(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The jacket  was purchased at Amritsar  and cause of action has arisen in favour of the complainant against opposite party at Amritsar, therefore, this Forum has the territorial jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint.

2.       Upon notice despite due service, none put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party and as such opposite party was ordered to be  proceeded against ex-parte.

3.       In his bid to prove the case, Sh. Ravinder Singh,Advocate counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-1, copy of Invoice Ex.C-2, copy of price Tag Ex.C-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

4.       We have heard the  ld.ccounsel for the complainant and have carefully gone through the record on the file.

5.       The complainant has reiterated the allegations contained in the complaint vide her affidavit Ex.C-1. The complainant has also produced on record copy of the price tag, which denotes the maximum retail price inclusive of all taxes to be Rs. 2499/-. Whereas vide bill/invoice, the opposite party has charged Rs. 75.59 paise in excess on the pretext of tax. There was absolutely no reply or authority of the opposite party to charge Rs. 75.59 paise in excess, than the price mentioned on the retail tag. The act and conduct of the opposite party proves that it has practised unfair trade practice and it tantamount to gross deficiency in service on its part.  The evidence adduced by the complainant has gone unrebutted on record. As such the averments  made in the complaint as well as documentary evidence adduced with the complaint, have been accepted  to be correct by the opposite party impliedly.

6.       In our considered  opinion, the complainant is not only entitled to refund of the amount of Rs. 75.59 paise charged in excess , but he is also entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs. 4000/- alongwith litigation expenses amounting to Rs. 1000/-. . Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order ; failing which awarded amount shall carry interest @ 6% p.a from the date of the passing of this order until full and final payment. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 8.5.2017