The case of the complainant is that the complainant went to the shop of O.P for purchase of materials and after purchased he make payment of the materials according to the price of the materials and he notice that additional charge was made for supply of carry bag. The O.P has taken illegally the cost of carry bag as the said carry bag was printed for the advertisement of the O.P company and according to law the O.P company can not take money for the purpose of said carry bag which was printed for the advertisement of the company. It is a clear case of unfair trade practice. O.P is entitled to get the refund of said money along with the cost of his mental agony and litigation.
After admission of this case the notice was sent to the O.P by registered post with A/D card and according to postal track report the said consignment notice was delivered to the O.P on 19/01/2023 but the O.P did not turn up to contest this case. Hence, ex-parte.
In support of his case complainant files evidence-on-affidavit and Xerox copy of documents.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the complainant a consumer u/s. 2(7)(ii) of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 ?
- Has this Commission jurisdiction to try the instant case?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?
- Is the complainant entitled to get any relief/reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Considering the nature and character of the case all points are interlinked to each other as such all such points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of brevity and convenience.
Point Nos. 1 and 2:- The complainant has purchased some materials of the O.P company. The Xerox copy of tax invoice proves the same that he purchased the readymade garments from the O.P on 30/11/2022 and 04/12/2022. So according to the law the complainant is a consumer and he is residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this commission and the O.P runs his business also within the jurisdiction of this Commission and therefore, this Commission has territorial jurisdiction to try this case as per section 34(d) of the C.P. Act, 2019.
Point Nos. 3 and 4:- According to the complaint the complainant has purchased some readymade garments from the O.P in two dates by two separate tax invoice. The allegation is that O.P took charge of non woven bag of Rs. 3/- each from the complainant and the said bag was printed for advertisement of the name of the company along with its business. In this case O.P did not turn up to contest the case. After considering perusal of the case record we find that the complainant purchased readymade garments in two times and two separate tax invoices were issued to him in two separate dates. It also appears in both the tax vouchers the cost of carry bag was charged at the Rs. 3/- each. The carry bag is filed by the complainant but he has only filed one carry bag from which it appears that as it is a non woven bag MRP of Rs. 4/- and the said carry bag was printed in the name of the O.P for purchase of the advertisement. It is a settle principle of law that if the payment is made for any carry bag the company should not make any advertisement in the said carry bag for his shop. The complainant is not the advertisement agent of the O.P and this practice is totally unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P. The O.P can not force any customer to make payment of carry bag which is the mode of advertisement of his shop. So the O.P is liable to return of the said amount of carry bag along with the compensation as well as the litigation cost.
In the light of the above observation we are of the view that the present complainant deserve to succeed against the O.P. The O.P is duty bound to return of the said amount. The case is allowed ex-parte.
Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, for ends of justice; it is;-
-
that the instant case be and the same is allowed ex-parte with costs against the O.P. The O.P is directed to refund the complainant of Rs. 6/- for the price of two carry bags which was wrongly charged. He is also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 2,000/- for his mental and physical harassment of the complainant. The complainant himself is an Advocate and he has conducted this case himself so there is no question of payment of litigation cost. Where of punitive damage the O.P is hereby directed to deposit another Rs. 2,000/- to the Consumer Legal Aid Account of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Alipurduar. The O.Ps are hereby directed to pay the total decreetal amount of Rs. 2,006/- to the complainant along with the another amount of Rs. 2,000/- to the Consumer Legal Aid Account of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Alipurduar within 30 days from this day failing which the complainant will be at liberty to put this decree into execution according to law.
The O.P is hereby directed to provide free carry bag to all the customers where the advertisement of his shop is done who purchases from it’s shop and stop the unfair practices that is to charge for carry bag with the advertisement of his shop. The O.P can take charge of the carry bag where no advertisement is done.
Let a copy of this final order be sent to the concerned parties through registered post with A/D or by hand forthwith for information and necessary action.
Dictated & Corrected by me
