DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA.

Consumer Complaint No.212 of 18/06/2019

Decided on: 04/12/2019

J D Bansal son of Sh. D C Bansal, resident of House No.4, Dhillon Marg, Model Town, Patiala.

                                                                                              ….Complainant

Versus

Kapsons, M/s Kapsons Fashion Pvt. Ltd. Shop No.7-8, 22 No. Phatak Bhupindra Road, Patiala through its Managing Director/ Authorized Representative.

                                                                                              ….Opposite party

Complaint U/S 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act.

QUORUM

                     Smt. Inderjeet Kaur, Member

                     Sh. B. S. Dhaliwal, Member

ARGUED BY:

                        Sh. J. D. Bansal Adv. /complainant.

                            Opposite party Ex-parte.

ORDER

                         INDERJEET KAUR, MEMBER

1. The complainant J. D. Bansal (here-in-after referred as complainant) has filed the complaint u/s 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (here-in-after referred as Act) against Kapsons (here-in-after referred as opposite party).

2. Briefly stated that on 25/05/2019, the complainant visited the shop of the OP located at 22 No. Phatak Bhupindra Road, Patiala for purchase of apparels for himself. He selected some apparels for himself. OP vide invoice/ cash Memo dt.25/5/2019 gave a discount of Rs.500/- and charged Rs.5600/- from the complainant. However in bifurcation of the amount, the total gross amount waas Rs.5596/- and Rs.4/- was charged by OP for the carry bags but the OP added the said amount of Rs.4/- in the bill as Kanya. After paying the bill the complainant went back to his home there he noted that the cash attendant has charged Rs.4/- for the carry bag. The fraudulent tactics on part of the OP caused great mental shock to the complainant as OP at his own charged Rs.4/- on the pretext of carry bags and then mentioned the said amount of Rs.4/- as 'Kanya' which clearly shows malafide and dishonest on part of OP. The Op has not only breached the trust of the complainant but has also caused grave mental agony and trauma to the complainant, as he is under impression that OP might have earlier also charged excess amount over and above MRP from the complainant and as such there is clear cut deficiency in service on the part of OP.

3. It is alleged that the complainant immediately went back to the store and talked the attendant that they have charged for the carry bag illegally. OP misbehaved with the complainant and abused him and refused to refund the excess amount. That the complainant is victim at the hands of the OP owing to ill-acts on part of OP which gesticulate that there is clear cut deficiency in services on part of OP and the OP is indulged in mal-practice and unfair trade.

4. It is further alleged that complainant issued a register legal notice dt.28/5/2019 to the OP directing the Op to refund the amount of Rs.4/- charge over and above the actual cost and further to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant and to pay Rs.11000/- as costs of legal notice to the complainant within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the legal notice,but neither the OP responded to the legal notice nor did any needful.

5. In the backdrop of these facts, the complainant has prayed for:-

i) To refund Rs.4/- charged over and above the actual cost by the OP.

ii) To pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, tension, harassment, humiliation and inconvenience suffered by the complainant.

Iii) To pay Rs.15000/- as costs of litigation to the complainant.

6. Notice was issued to the OP to contest the claim of the complainant. OP despite service failed to put appearance, Hence proceeded against ex-parte.

7. In evidence complainant has tendered Ex.CA his affidavit along with documents Ex.C-1 copy of bill, Ex.C-2 copy of Legal notice, Ex.C-3 postal receipt, Ex.C-4 carry bag and closed the evidence.

8. We have carefully perused the complaint, gone through the evidence produced on the file and heard the arguments addressed by the complainant.

9. At the outset, the ld. Counsel contended that charging for a carry bag even without mentioning the same at the store is deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice; charging for a carry bag is against the interest of the consumer; the retailer can not run away from its duty to supply a carry bag free of cost to a consumer who buys goods from it against consideration paid and in the instant case it was no where mentioned in the store that the customer will be charged extra for the carry bags. It is also contended that the cash attendant had also not told the complainant of charging regarding carry bag and the complainant came to know of the charging on account of carry bag when he checked the invoice after reaching his residence. When the complainant approached the Manager of OP for the refund of illegal charging on account of carry bag, he straight way refused to oblige. It not only amounts to deficiency in service but also a deliberate unfair trade practice, therefore, complainant be accepted in terms of the relief prayed for.

10. It is an admitted fact that the complainant had purchased some items from the OP on 25/05/2019 and Rs.4/- were charged for the carry bag and this fact is corroborated by the Invoice Ex.C-1. There are no rules or notification that justified that charging of extra money for carry bags. It is not only odd but also very inconvenient for the consumer to carry food item(s) or articles without a carry bag when purchased in good number or in bulk. Retailers are not only making neet profit on the sale of bags but also making gullible consumers pay for its brand promotions. It is an opt to mention that the “Consumer Forums” are flooded with such complaints of charging of carry bags and the issue has also been decided by “Forums” declaring this trade practice as unfair. These decisions have even upheld by State Commission (s). The retailers like Kapsons Fashion Pvt. Ltd. were/ are making “Mockery of Law” by charging for carry bags brazenly despite it being held an unfair trade practice, as if strict and stringent directions are awaited. Certainly, the act of ignoring the orders and putting an extra burden on gullible consumer; warrants heavy penalty so as to curb this unfair trade practice.

The retailers can not run away from its duty to supply the carry bags free of cost to a consumer who buys goods from it against consideration paid. The complainant cannot be expected to take away the purchased articles in hand without a carry bag from the billing counter up to him or her destination or vehicle. In this backdrop, charges for such things (Carry Bag) cannot be separately fristed upon the consumer and would amount to over charging.

11. The version of the complainant of charging of Rs.4/- on account of carry bag remained unrebutted and unchallenged and there is no reason to disbelieve it. Deficiency in service vis-a- vis unfair trade practice on the part of OP stands established.

12. Thus allowing the complaint, we direct the OP to refund the amount of Rs.4/- with another sum of Rs.3000/- as compensation inclusive of costs for causing harassment, inconvenience, mental agony including litigation expenses. OP will comply with the order within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

13. The complaint could not be decided in the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of cases.

14. Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of costs under the rules. Thereafter file be indexed and consigned.

PRONOUNCED

DATED: 04/12/2019

                                                 B. S. DHALIWAL                                          INDERJEET KAUR

                                                             MEMBER                                                             MEMBER