1. The brief fact of the case of complainant is that on 01.04.2018 he purchased two numbers of Kingfisher beer can from O.P. for Rs. 220/- vide invoice no. NIL dated 01.04.2018.  It is alleged that at his home, complainant found that the price of each beer can is Rs. 90/- and on asking to O.P. regarding excess price, who rudely replied and stated that due to severe hot they are taking excess price and neither refunded the excess amount of Rs. 40/- nor retake the allege beer can, thus showing deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, he filed this case with a prayer to direct the O.P. to refund the excess price of Rs. 40/- and to pay Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation and costs of litigation.
    
2. O.P. appeared in the case and filed his counter admitting the sale of alleged two numbers of cans to the complainant but denied the other allegations contending that they are ON shop wholesale point which allows the customer only for consumption of liquor on the vendor premises with supply of snacks items.  Further contended that they have taken Rs. 180/- towards costs of beer cans and Rs. 40/- towards costs of snacks and drinking water and complainant might have purchased the alleged beer cans from any other OFF shop of the area, as they are not allowing the customers to take out any liquor items outside their premises and with contentions he prayed to dismiss the case.
    
3. Complainant filed the invoice bill against the alleged beer cans whereas the O.P. has filed only the guidelines issued by Excise Department, Govt. of Odisha.  Perused the case record and materials available therein.
    
4. It is an admitted fact that the complainant has purchased two numbers of Kingfisher Beer Cans from the O.P. for Rs. 110/- each and the O.P. has also issued invoice to that effect. The allegations of complainant is that the MRP of each beer can is of Rs. 90/- whereas the O.P. has taken Rs.110/- for each beer cans, whereas the contentions of O.P. is that they have taken Rs. 90/- for each beer cans and the excess amount of Rs. 20/- has been received for supply of snacks, drinking water and charges for supply of beer cans by their suppliers. 
    
5. Now the question arose whether the excess charges taken by the O.P. is legal and justified ?
    
6. In this connection, we have carefully gone through the documents filed by the parties.  Complainant filed the copy of invoice bill raised by the O.P. against only two numbers of Kingfisher Beer Cans, each for Rs. 110/- and in toto, the amount comes to Rs. 220/- but nowhere it is mentioned that they excess amount of Rs. 40/- was charged for supply of snacks, drinking water and service charges.  We feel, the O.P. has not supplied the snacks items to the complainant.  Had the O.P. supply the snacks items to the complainant, they must have mentioned the names of such items.  Further we have gone through the documents filed by the O.P. i.e. guidelines issued the Excise Department, Govt. of Odisha, which does not disclose the selling procedure at ON shop point.  However, clause no. 4.2.5. of the said guidelines emphasizes regarding Maximum Retails Price, which elaborates the conditions of selling the product on MRP basis as “Maximum Retail Price (MRP) will be displaced on each bottle of FMFL, IMFL, Wine, Beer and Country Liquor and sold accordingly.  The vendors are required to issue cash memo to all consumers and not charge above MRP failing which the vendors shall be penalized with fine specified in PART - A.  All IMFL ‘OFF’ shops & CL shops are required to display up to date MRP chart.”  On the observation of the said guidelines, we do not feel that the O.P. has right to issue any invoice mentioning the price of any liquor or beer or whatsoever, with higher price and that too without mentioning any details of snacks items if provided at their ON shop point. Hence, we think that the O.P. has taken excess price against the alleged two numbers of beer cans, which in our view, is not justified and also coming under the purview of deficiency in service, hence in our view, complainant must have suffered from some sort of mental agony due to financial loss and deserves to be compensated.
    
7. Further it is ascertained from the submissions of parties that the only allegation of complainant is regarding excess price, but the complaint petition does not disclose his sufferings.  Though the complainant raised that the O.P. has rudely behaved, but no evidence is brought out by the complainant to that effect and without any cogent evidence, the allegations regarding misbehave by the O.P. is not sustainable.  Hence this order.

                                                                                                             ORDER

        The complaint petition is allowed in part.  The O.P. is herewith directed to refund the excess price of Rs. 40/- being taken in their counter and to pay Rs. 3000/- towards compensation towards causing financial loss and to pay Rs. 500/- towards costs of litigation within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the compensation amount shall carry interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of sale i.e. 01.04.2018 till payment.

        Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 08^th day of March, 2021.

        Issue free copy to the parties concerned.