Punjab

SAS Nagar Mohali

CC/411/2017

Ashok Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Puma Viom Enterprises - Opp.Party(s)

Sahil Dawar

01 Mar 2018

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/411/2017
 
1. Ashok Kumar
S/o Sh. Lt. Kanhya Lal, R/o H.no.1263, Sector 34/C, Chandigarh.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Puma Viom Enterprises
GF-15 COSMO PLAZA, Zirakpur, Punjab 140603, through its Proprietor/Manager/Authorized Signatory.
2. Puma Sports India Pvt. Ltd.
registered office 509, CMH Rd, Indira Nagar, Bangalore-560038, through its Proprietor/Manager/Authorized Signatory.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  G.K.Dhir PRESIDENT
  Ms. Natasha Chopra MEMBER
  Mr. Amrinder Singh MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
Sh.Sahil Dawar, cl for the complainant
 
For the Opp. Party:
OP ex-parte
 
Dated : 01 Mar 2018
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH NAGAR (MOHALI)

Consumer Complaint No.411 of 2017

                                                 Date of institution:  15.06.2017                                                     Date of decision   :  01.03.2018

 

Ashok Kumar son of Lt. Kanhya Lal, resident of House No.1263, Sector 34-, Chandigarh.

…….Complainant

Vs

 

1.     Puma Viom Enterprises, GF-15, COSMO PLAZA, Zirakpur, Punjab-140603 through its Proprietor/Manager/Authorised Signatory.

……..Opposite Party

 

2.     PUMA Sports India Private Limited, registered Office: 509, CMH Rd., Indira Nagar, Bangalore 560038, through its Proprietor/Manager/Authorised signatory.

 

……..Opposite Party

 

Complaint under Section 12 of

the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Quorum:    Shri G.K. Dhir, President,

                Shri Amrinder Singh Sidhu, Member

                Mrs. Natasha Chopra, Member.

 

Present:     Shri Sahil Dawar, counsel for complainant.

                OP Ex-parte.

Order by :-  Shri G.K. Dhir, President.

 

Order

 

               Complainant, after knowing about the discount offer of OPs, visited premises of OP No.1 on 27.05.2017 for purchase of Ferrari Fan Wear Wallet, on which MRP of Rs.1,299/-  (inclusive of all taxes) was mentioned. Retail invoice bill for amount of Rs.890.85 N.P. inclusive of Rs.111.45 N.P. as VAT @ 14.300% was issued, despite the fact that this VAT cannot have been charged on the discounted price. That practice of charging extra VAT on the discounted MRP alleged to be unfair trade practice and that is why this complaint for seeking refund of amount of Rs.111.45 N.P. with interest alongwith compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.40,000/-, but litigation expenses of Rs.20,000/-.

2.             OPs are ex-parte in this case.

3.             Complainant to prove his case tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CW-1/1 alongwith documents Ex.C-1 and C-2 and thereafter closed evidence.

4.             Written arguments not submitted but oral arguments heard and records gone through.

5.             Contents of complaint as well as of affidavit and invoice Ex.C-2 establishes that Ferrari Fan Wear Wallet purchased by complainant after visiting OP No.1 at Zirakpur (District Mohali) on 27.05.2017 by paying price of Rs.890.85 N.P. including VAT amount of Rs.111.45 N.P. @ 14.300%.   MRP of the purchased products mentioned as Rs.1,299/- (inclusive of all taxes) on the tag, copy of which is produced on record as Ex.C-1. It is not disputed that discount was granted on the MRP and it is on the discounted price that VAT @ 14.300% = Rs.111.45 N.P. has been charged. Practice of charging VAT on the discounted price has been held to be unfair trade practice as per law laid down by  Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in case titled as M/s Aero Club (Wood Land) through its Manager Vs. Rakesh Sharma bearing Revision Petition No.3477 of 2016 decided on 04.01.2017 as well as in case bearing First Appeal No.136 of 2017 titled as M/s Aero Club Vs. Ravinder Singh Dhanju decided on 23.05.2017 by Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT Chandigarh.  In view of this legal position, certainly OPs adopted unfair trade practice by charging VAT on the discounted price, which caused mental harassment and agony to complainant, due to which he is entitled for refund of excess charged amount alongwith compensation for mental harassment and agony and also to litigation expenses.

6.             As a sequel of above discussion, the complaint is allowed with direction to OPs to refund excess charged amount of Rs.111.45 N.P. with interest @ 6% per annum w.e.f. 27.05.2017 till payment. Compensation for mental agony and harassment of Rs.2,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.2,000/- more allowed in favour of complainant and against  OPs.  Payment of amount of compensation and litigation expenses be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Certified copies be supplied to the parties as per rules.  File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Announced

March 01, 2018.

                                                                (G.K. Dhir)

                                                                President

 

                                                                   (Amrinder Singh Sidhu)                                                                 Member

 

(Mrs. Natasha Chopra)

Member

 
 
[ G.K.Dhir]
PRESIDENT
 
[ Ms. Natasha Chopra]
MEMBER
 
[ Mr. Amrinder Singh]
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.