Extra charge over printed price by the OP, Kolkata Fashion Bazar has aggravated the complainant to lodge this complaint with this forum under section 12 of CP Act,1986.
The summation of this case goes thus. On 28/11/2017 the complainant has chosen a slipper with a MRP printed Rs. 159/- and the product code KFB34210. But, after billing Rs. 325/- in lieu of Rs. 159/- as printed was charged and he has to pay the said billing amount Rs. 325/-. The very next day, the complainant goes further for redressal of the grievance as it was assured by the OP on the day of purchase. But, the OP has denied to redress the grievance of the complainant on 29/11/2017. So, the complainant has claimed Rs. 50000/- including the litigation cost for his harassment and mental agony as compensation.
The OP in its written version has denied the averment of the complainant and stated that due to some technical error the Bar Code with the price tag on the slipper has mismatched and the complainant agreed to purchase the same slipper at price Rs. 325/- instead of the price tag Rs. 159/-. In the written version the OP has also stated that on another occasion the complainant came to the return counter of the OP with the specific product and approach to return the excess amount when the representative of the OP has given three alternative opportunity to the complainant. But, the complainant had not agreed upon any of the alternatives. In course of argument the Ld. Lawyer for the OP has stated that refund of the amount for the good sold is not possible.
Points to be discussed:
- Whether the complainant is a consumer to the OP?
- Whether the OP has done any wrong within the
purview of section 12 of the CP Act,1986?
Decision with reasons:
In regard to point (1) the purchase bill filed by the OP
kept in record and the written version of the OP reveals that the complainant being a purchaser of the product marketed by the OP is a consumer.
The OP has admitted in its written version that the excess amount over the printed price tag has been charged from the complainant through some technical mistake. But, the Bar Code verification reveals the original price of a product; so, when the Bar Code verification had shown higher price than the price tagged on the product. It should be brought to the knowledge of the purchaser. If the customer agrees upon, the price tag is also to be torn off and the original price according to the Bar Code verification should be pasted. The OP cannot file any such document that proves that he has taken the steps as stated earlier. The OP in its written version has stated that the complainant has purchased the slipper knowing full well the mismatching of the price tagged & the price on verification of Bar Code. They have also stated that the complainant had come to return the product with a claim to return the billing amount paid to the OP. This is self contradictory. Citation:- In the case, Sarvajit Singh Vs. Batra Hotel, Rawalsar, III(2004) CPJ 544 practice of charging extra price over printed price leads to unjustified cost on customer under section 2(nnn) of the CP Act,1986. In the instant case, the OP has imposed unjustified cost under section 2(nnn) of the said act.
Hence,
ORDERED
The OP is directed to pay Rs. 2000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony including the litigation cost within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which the compensation amount will bear interest at the rate 8% per annum till the full realization of the amount.
The case be and the same succeeds on contest. So, the case is disposed off.
Let a plain copy of this order be furnished to the parties
forthwith free of cost.
