BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.502 of 2019

      Date of Instt. 18.10.2019

      Date of Decision:19.05.2022

Kuljit Singh S/o Late S. Karnail Singh Resident of House No.2290, Phase-10, Sector 64, SAS Nagar (Mohali) Punjab now C/o Tarsem Lal Jassal Resident of House No.B-719, Jassal Street, Ram Nagar, Near Railway Crossing, Industrial Area, Jalandhar City, Punjab.

..........Complainant

Versus

M/s Chadha Sweet House, Santokhpura, Jalandhar, through its Authorized Signatory/Proprietor.

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)   

Present:       Sh. M. P. Nayyar, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

                   Sh. Mukhtiar Mohammad, Adv. Counsel for OP.

Order

Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that on 21.09.2019 at about 11:20 am, complainant has visited the office of the OP to purchase some sweet and the OP assured the complainant that Pista Pera is the best sweet of his shop. At the time of purchase, the OP disclosed the rate of Pista Pera as Rs.340/- per KG. Only on the assurance of OP, complainant has purchased two kg of Pista Pera @ Rs.340/- per kg and paid the amount of Rs.680/- to OP in cash and the OP has issued invoice no.1119000052 dated 21.09.2019 in this regard. The OP has packed this sweet of Pista Pera in a very heavy box and weighed the sweet for 1 Kilogram including the box. The complainant has raised objection for this that the OP has wrongly weighed the sweet including the box as the OP has received the charges of 1 kg sweet only but now the OP weighed the sweet alongwith box and box also cost to the complainant Rs.340/- per kg due to weighed including the sweet. But the OP has not heard the complainant and told the complainant that it is routine work of OP and in this way the OP charged very heavy rates of boxes from all the complainant as well as other customers by weighing including the sweet by the OP. Then the complainant come back at home and weighed the empty box which comes to about 333 gms, so the one box cost the complainant about Rs.114/-. In this way weight of both boxes is 666 gms and cost of both the boxes is Rs.228/- which is too much higher side. Further, in these boxes there is only sweet of 1 kg 333 gms and the OP charged amount of 2 kg sweet, which is clear cut deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs as the OP charged the amount of 1 kg sweet but provided only 666 gms sweet to the complainant. The official of OP said that if the complainant wants  1 kg sweet, then they will provide the same in polythene bag. This act of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of OP caused the complainant great mental tension, agony and harassment and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to refund the amount charges in excess alongwith interest and further the OP be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable and deserves to be dismissed. The complainant mis-stated and twisted the fact with dishonest and for ulterior motive just to blackmail the OP in manner best known to the complainant otherwise there is no reference in invoice dated 21.09.2019 regarding selling of Pista Pera @ Rs.340/- per kg. The invoice shows Pista Pera 2pc. 340 to the tune of Rs.680/- which means the rate of one packet I Rs.340/- and not @ Rs.340/- per kg. The complainant mentioned in his complaint that the OP packed the sweet of Pista Pera in a very heavy box and weighed the sweet for 1 kg including box. The complainant seems to be an educated person and have gone through tax invoice and there is no reference of the items in kilogram wise but it is mentioned as packet wise. Since, the invoice does not contain the quantity per kg. as such the present complaint is misconceived and is based on false and frivolous grounds for the reasons best known to the complainant and is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the complainant has not come to the Court with clean hands and has suppressed the true and material facts from this Commission. No cause of action accrued to the complainant to file the present complaint against the OP. The complainant is stopped from filing the present complaint by his own acts, conduct, admissions, omissions, latches etc. The complainant has got no locus-standi to file the present complaint against the OP. On merits, the factum with regard to purchasing the Pista Pera by the complainant is admitted, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by the counsel for the complainant very minutely.

6.                It has been proved on record that the complainant purchased 2 kg of Pista Pera @ Rs.340/- per kg and paid the amount of Rs.680/- to OPs, vide Ex.C-1. The grudge of the complainant is that the OP weighed the sweets for 1kg including the box and received the charges of 1 kg of sweet, which was including the weight of box and the weight of the sweet was less. When the complainant weighed the empty box, it came to about 333 grams. So, the cost of the box was about Rs.114/- and the OP has received Rs.228/- of both the boxes in excess and the sweet weighed was only 1 kg 333 gms instead of 2kg, whereas he charged the amount for 2 kg sweet. The complainant has proved the copy of box, copy of weight meter and the original empty box as Ex.C-2, Ex.C-4 and Ex.C-3 respectively. This is allegedly unfair trade practice on the part of the OP.

7.                The OP has alleged that the complainant has not purchased the sweets in kg rather he has purchased the sweets packet wise and Rs.340/- were charged for one packet. Though, it has been mentioned in Ex.C-1 that two packets were sold for Rs.680/-, but Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-4 clearly shows that the sweets in two packets was 1 kg 333 gms, meaning thereby that there was 666 gms short from 2 kg and this 666 gms was the weight of 2 boxes. It was 166 gm above the half kg. This is unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs to sell the sweets in packets by telling the customers the rate of one kg and then mentioning the same in the Invoice as sold in packets. It is not the case of the OPs that the complainant was made aware that the rate of sweet is Rs.340/- per 666 gms and not one kg. This is a deficiency in service. It is the duty of the OP to make the customer aware of the fact that the sweet is being sold in a packet i.e. in a box and the weight of box is included in 1 kg. There is nothing on the record to show that this fact was ever brought to the notice of the complainant or this fact was ever displayed by the OP in his shop or in the box, where the sweets are kept with rate list. Thus, the complainant is entitled for the relief as claimed.

8.                In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OP is directed to refund the excess amount of Rs.228/- of two boxes alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing complaint till its realization. Further, OP is directed to pay compensation including litigation expenses of Rs.3000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant. The OP is further directed to make the customers know about the total weight of the sweets including the box and excluding the box in future. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

9.                Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna               Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj     

19.05.2022         Member                          Member              President