| Final Order / Judgement | - Brief fact of the case of the complainant is that for the construction of her house, on 18.04.2018 she purchased 15 nos. of Ultra Tech cement bags from O.P. No.1 and paid Rs. 4,425/- @ 295/- for each bag vide invoice no. 1919 dated 18.04.2018. It is alleged that after brought the cement bags to her house, she found that cost of each bag as mentioned therein for Rs. 263/- and on being asked to the O.P.No.1 regarding excess price taken by him, who replied that due to taxation system of O.P. No.2 and as per the norms of concerned company, he is charging excess price and also the O.P.No.1 neither refunded the excess amount of Rs. 480/- for total bags nor took back the cement bags.It is further alleged that on 19.04.2018 while she narrated the facts of illegal practice of O.P. No.1 to the O.P. No.2, they paid no heed to her.Thus with other allegations, the complainant filed this case with a prayer to direct the O.Ps to refund the excess price taken from her alongwith Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation and costs to her.
- The O.P.No.1 appeared in this case and filed his counter versions admitting the sale of alleged cement bags to the complainant but denied the allegations of complainant contending that the complainant asked him for purchase of 15 nos. of cement bags on credit basis, to which the O.P. No.1 denied, as such the complainant filed the case against him. Further it is contended that he purchased 100 nos. of cement bags from one M/s Sandeep Trading Company, Raipur on payment of Rs. 22,300/- and paid Rs. 6,000/- towards transport charges and Rs. 4/- for unloading charge per bag and at his shop the cost of one cement comes to Rs. 287/- and due to damage of cement bags he fixed the cost of cement bag for Rs. 295/- per one bag with minimum profit and also contended that at the time of purchase the maximum price written over the cement bag was Rs. 306/- and with other contentions, he prayed to dismiss the case against him.
- The O.P. No.2 appeared in this case and filed his counter denying the allegations of complainant made against them, have contended that complainant has never made any complaint to them, but as per direction of The Chairman, District Protection Council & Collector, Malkangiri, they have submitted their enquiry report as on 26.05.2018 and also submitted they are only to check the evasion of tax, if any, made by any business establishments and with other contentions showing their no liabilities, they prayed to drop the case against them.
- Parties have filed their respective documents. Heard from the parties at length. Perused the records and documents available therein.
- There is no disputes regarding the sale of alleged cement bags to the complainant by the O.P. No.1 vide invoice no. 1919 dated 18.04.2018 on payment of Rs. 4,425/- for 15 nos. of cement bags. There is also no dispute regarding the fact to the effect that as per direction of The Chairman, District Protection Council & Collector, Malkangiri, the O.P. No. 2 made an enquiry with the O.P. No. 1 and ascertained the relevant documents and submitted their report as on 26.05.2018 to him and also submitted before this Forum. The allegations of complainant only regarding the excess price taken by the O.P. No. 1 per each bag for Rs. 32/- and in total for Rs. 480/- which is against the law. Whereas the contentions of O.P. No.1 is that excess price is taken only due to unloading charge of Rs.4/- per each bag and costs towards damages of cements bags.
- Now the question arose
i.whether the excess price taken by O.P.No.1 is justified as per law,
ii.whether the complainant suffered financially and mental agony due to excess price taken by O.P.No.1, if so what relief she is entitled to ?
- Coming to first point, we have carefully gone through the documents filed by the parties and ascertained that complainant has filed the retail invoice vide no. 1919 dated 18.04.2018 to prove his submissions that as per the retail invoice the cost of one cement bag is Rs. 295/- and produced the alleged cement bag showing the MRP mentioned therein is for Rs. 263/-. Whereas, the said allegations was challenged by the O.P. No.1 but only submitted that he purchased 100 bags of cements from M/s Sandeep Trading Company, Raipur for Rs. 22,300/- and transporting charge per one bag is Rs.60/- and unloading charge was per one bag is Rs. 4/- and due to damage of cement bags, he fixed the costs of one bag of cement for Rs. 295/- but could not produce any cogent evidence to that effect, as such the versions of O.P. No. 1 is not believable. Further we have gone through documents filed by the O.P.No.2 i.e. retail invoice no. 1919 dated 04.03.2018 which clearly shows that the O.P.No.1 has sold the alleged products to the complainant as on 04.03.2018 whereas he issued the bill to the complainant on dated 18.04.2018 which is clearly visible in the naked eye. Further the report of O.P. No.2 shows that retail price of one bag is Rs. 295/- whereas their report shows as follows :
Ultratech Cement per bagRs. 174.22
G.S.T. @ 28%Rs.48.78
Freight Charges per bagRs. 60.00
Unloading charge per bagRs.4.00
Rs. 287.00
if it is considered that the retail price of one bag cement is for Rs. 287/- than also the O.P. No.1 has charged excess price of Rs. 8/- per bag. On point of discussion, it is clearly observed that the complainant has paid Rs. 295/- per one cement bag against Rs. 263/- as mentioned in each cement bags i.e. to say excess price of Rs. 32/- per one cement bag.
Further as per dictionary language MRP denotes as “A maximum retail price is a manufacturer calculated price that is the highest price that can be charged for a product sold in India and Bangladesh. However, retailers may choose to sell products for less than the MRP” .
As such, considering the documents filed by the parties and as per the legal meaning of the word “MRP”, we feel, the activity of O.P. No.1 is nothing but the principle of unfair trade practice only to exploit the hard earnings of customers, which is not justified as per law. Accordingly, the answer goes against the O.P. No. 1.
- Coming to the second point of the issues, the allegations of complainant is that due to unfair trade practice she suffered financial loss and non action taken by O.P. No.2 she also faced mental agony. We feel, without any cogent evidence the allegations made against the O.P.No.2 is not sustainable. However, as per discussions made in the foregoing para, the complainant has suffered financial loss of Rs. 480/- (Rs. 32/- X 15 nos. of cement bags) towards purchasing of 15 nos. of cement bags from the O.P.No.1.Definitely, loss of amount may put a person in mental agony.Considering the submissions of the complainant and documentary evidence against the O.P.No.1, we feel that complainant only have suffered financial loss due to the unfair trade practice followed by the O.P.No.1 for which she must be compensated with adequate compensation.Hence this order.
ORDER The complaint petition is allowed in part. The O.P.No.1 is herewith directed to refund the excess amount of Rs. 480/- taken by him to the complainant. Further the O.P.No.1 is herewith directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 2,000/- towards costs of litigation to the complainant. All the directions should be complied within 30 days from the receipt of this order, failing which, the excess amount of Rs. 480/- will carry 12% interest from the date of purchase i.e. from 18.04.2018 till the date of payment. Since there is no evidence against the O.P.No.2, no order against them. Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 27th day of March, 2019. Issue free copy to the parties concerned. | |
