Orissa

Kendrapara

CC/53/2023

Rashmi Ranjan Behera - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S Pratap Automobiles, - Opp.Party(s)

Sri Deb Kishore Kar

12 Dec 2023

ORDER

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
KENDRAPARA, ODISHA
 
Complaint Case No. CC/53/2023
( Date of Filing : 29 Mar 2023 )
 
1. Rashmi Ranjan Behera
S/o- Sashi Sekhar Behera At/Po- Sandhapalli Ps- Pattamundai Dist-Kendrapara
Odisha
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/S Pratap Automobiles,
At-Plot No. 379/3677,Khata No. 1755/44 At/Po- Beltal Ps-Pattamundai Dist-Kendrapara
Odisha
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Pravat Kumar Padhi PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Bibekananda Das MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Sri Deb Kishore Kar, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 None, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 12 Dec 2023
Final Order / Judgement

MR. PRAVAT KUMAR PADHI, PRESIDENT:-

          Complainant has filed the  C.C.Case No. 53/2023 U/s-35 of C.P.Act, 2019 seeking following relief:-

          Honbl’e Commission may direct the Ops to pay Rs. 20,000/- towards mental agony, litigation cost. Further direct the Ops have adopted unfair trade practice & managed to sale the kit at higher price.

          Brief fact of the case is that the Complainant purchased a Royal Enfield Brakeshoe Kit with spring from the Op against service free invoice on 01.03.23vide Code No. 888337 with customer amount Rs. 350/- (including GST/SGST/CGST). After payment of above amount & found on the above kit show that maximum retail price is 320/- inclusive of all taxes in respect of the above brakeshoe kit with spring bearing code No. 888337. Complainant registered his protest as to how Rs. 30/- more was realized than the maximum retail price as shown in the kit package by the manufacture. But the Op instead of settling the issue raised by the Complainant gave evasive reply in a taunting voice showing red eyes.

          Notice to Ops was sent on dt. 31.03.23, but none appeared upto 27.04.23 to 09.10.23 and today also both parties remained absent.

          We perused the record and found that cost of the product mentioned in the packed is Rs. 320/- M.R.P. But the Op has taken Rs. 350/- including G.S.T., which in our considered view amounts to unfair trade practice as defined U/s-2(47) of C.P.Act, 2019.

          We therefore held that Op has committed unfair trade practice by taking Rs. 30/- in excess than the MRP. Question arises what should be the reasonable amount towards mental agony and compensation to be given to the Complainant. By applying the principle of balance of convenience, it is our considered view that 20 times of the excess amount will be just and proper amount towards the cost of mental agony for which we direct the Op to refund Rs. 30/- and pay Rs. 600/- towards mental agony and Rs. 1000/- towards cost of this litigation, which shall be paid within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the Op shall pay Rs. 50/- per day after 45 days.

With the aforesaid observation and direction the C.C.Case No. 53/2023 is allowed & accordingly disposed off.

                              Issue extract of the order to the parties for compliance.   

           Pronounced in the open Commission, on this the 12thday of December,2023.

                            I, agree.

                              Sd/-                                                    Sd/-

                         MEMBER                                           PRESIDENT

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Pravat Kumar Padhi]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Bibekananda Das]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.