Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao, President:- The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony for extra charging of Rs.7/- on purchase of a thumps-up bottle; Rs.5,000/- towards expenses; Rs.2,000/- towards other expenses.
2. In brief the averments of the complaint are these:
The opposite party is running a Kirana and General shop in Piduguralla and used to sell cool drink bottles. The complainant on 06-06-12 purchased 1.25 liters of thumps- up bottle for which the opposite party charged Rs.45/- instead of Rs.38/- being MRP. The complainant’s friend also required the opposite party to charge Rs.38/- only. The complainant is thus engaged in unfair trade practice. The opposite party issued a slip contending that he was an illiterate.
On account of such attitude of the opposite party the complainant suffered a lot mentally. The above conduct of the opposite party amounted to deficiency of service. The complainant estimated his mental agony at Rs.25,000/-; Rs.5,000/- towards expenses and Rs.2,000/- towards others. The complaint therefore be allowed.
3. The opposite party after receipt of summons remained exparte for the reasons best known to him.
4. Exs.A-1 and A-2 were marked on behalf of the complainant.
5. Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:
1. Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation and if so to what amount?
3. To what relief?
6. POINT No.1:- The complainant also filed 3rd party affidavit of one N.K. Sekhar in support of his contentions. Name of the 3rd party did not find place in the complaint. The complainant simply mentioned that a friend of him was present by that time. The complainant on 12-02-13 filed an attested affidavit in support of his allegations. The contents of the complainant’s affidavit and complaint remained uncontraverted as the opposite party remained exparte. We therefore opine that the opposite party committed unfair trade practice by charging more than MRP and it constituted deficiency of service. We answer this point against the opposite party.
7. POINT No.2:- The complainant claimed Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony; Rs.5,000/- towards expenses and Rs.2,000/- towards others. The compensation claimed and to be awarded should commensurate with the injury suffered. The complainant did not mention what the other damages which he sought. The complainant did not file any document to show that he incurred Rs.5,000/- towards expenses. Considering the merits of the case awarding a sum of Rs.500/- towards damages will meet ends of justice. We therefore answer this point accordingly in favour of the complainant.
8. POINT No.3:- In view of above finding in the result the complaint is allowed partly as indicated below:
- The opposite party is directed to sell cool drink bottles for the MRP printed on them.
- The opposite party is directed to return Re.7/- (Rupee seven only).
- The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards damages.
- The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs.
- The amounts ordered above shall be paid within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
- Destroy the empty cool drink (Ex.A-2) bottle after the
appeal time.
Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 22nd day of February, 2013.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For Complainant:
Ex.Nos. | DATE | DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS |
A1 | - | Paper slip showing Thumsup Rs.45/- |
A2 | - | Empty thumps up bottle |
For opposite party: NIL
PRESIDENT
NB: The parties are required to collect the extra sets within a month after receipt of this order either personally or through their advocate as otherwise the extra sets shall be weeded out.
