By Smt. Padmini Sudheesh, President: Petitioners case in brief is as follows: The petitioner is a retired Sub Inspector of Police and Senior Citizen. The petitioner purchased 2 dhothies from the respondent shop on 17.3.2007 by paying Rs.175/- in total vide bill No.4948. The value of the dhothies were stated as Rs.85/- at maximum retail price. The respondent received Rs.175/- in total. Instead of receiving Rs.85/- towards the value of item No.1 as maximum retail price, the respondent received Rs.90/- from the petitioner. The petitioner opened the cover only after reaching his home and he noticed that the respondent received Rs.5/- excess. He approached the respondent on 19.3.07 and requested him to return the additional amount received by him. But the respondent behaved in a rash manner and attempted to tear the bill. The petitioner issued a lawyer notice to the respondent on 20.3.07 and respondent received it on 23.3.07, but no remedy. Hence the petition. 2. Respondent has filed counter as follows: The respondent hasnt taken any extra amount from the petitioner as they are receiving the price on the sticker upon the items. The petitioner made this complaint only due to personal grudge. As a police officer he demanded the items free of cost and denied by the respondent. Hence dismiss the petition. 3. The points for consideration are: (1) Whether the petitioner is entitled for the excess amount realized? (2) Whether the petitioner is entitled for the compensation as prayed? (3) Reliefs and costs. 4. The evidence consists of Exts. P1 to P5, Exts. R1 to R3 and Mos-1, 2, MO3 and 4 also. 5. Point No.1: Ext. P1 is the bill dated 17.3.07 by which the petitioner has paid Rs.175/-. The M.R.P. shown on both the dhothies produced by the petitioner is Rs.85/- for each. As per Ext. P1 bill Rs.90/- + Rs.85/- have realized from the petitioner. For MO2 Rs.5/- more has charged. It is the well established position of law that only M.R.P. has to be realised from the purchasers. The respondent violated this principle and he is liable to provide compensation. The same kind of Dhothies were produced by the respondent. In those dhothies the price stickers are shown as Rs.85/- for one item and Rs.90/- for other item. But on the MO3 dhothi the sticker shows the price Rs.90/- is seen to be manipulated. The sticker is seen very old. But the sticker on MO2 the similar dhothi produced by petitioner is seen new. There is change of sticker by the respondent on the dhothi produced by him, which is MO3. The bill book is produced by the respondent and the bill No.4948 which is marked as Ext. R1 affirms the case of the petitioner. So the petitioner has to be compensated by the respondent. 6. Points-2 & 3: In the petition, it is also stated that the respondent attempted to tore the bill with an intention to destroy the evidence. Ext. P1, the bill produced by the petitioner is seen to be tored. In these circumstances, the petitioner is also entitled for loss towards mental agony. 7. In the result, petition is allowed and the respondent is directed to pay to the petitioner Rs.5/- (Rupees five only) the excess amount received; Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) as compensation and Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards costs. Comply the order within one month. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum, this the 4th day of July 2008.
