Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/19/224

Tirath Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance Retail Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Tirath Singh Adv.

11 May 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No: 224 dated 13.05.2019.                                                        Date of decision: 11.05.2022. 

 

Tirath Singh Grewal aged 35 years son of S. Raghbir Singh Grewal, resident of Village Kakowal, Tehsil and District Ludhiana.                                                                                                                                ..…Complainant

                                                Versus

Reliance Retail Ltd., Reliance Smart, MBD Neopolis Mall, Lower Ground Floor, Near Hotel Raddison, Feroepur Road, Adjacent to Rajguru Nagar, Ludhiana, through its Manager/Incharge                                                                                                                                                 …..Opposite party 

                   Complaint under Section 12 and 14 of The Consumer                                     Protection Act.

QUORUM:

SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Complainant Sh. Tirath Singh Grewal in                                                     person.

For OP                           :         Sh. Sahil Sharma, Advocate.

ORDER

PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

1.                In nutshell, the case of the complainant is that on 28.04.2019, the complainant visited outlet of the OP and purchase goods vide invoice No.69. However, the OP charged a sum of Rs.12/- for two carry bags for carrying goods purchased by the complainant. This amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OP. In the end, it has been requested that the OP be directed to refund Rs.12/- along with compensation of Rs.80,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-.

2.                Upon notice, OP appeared and contested the case. In the written statement filed by the OP, it has been, inter alia, pleaded that the complaint is not maintainable. According to the OP, as per rule 10 of the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011  no carry bag  shall be made available free of costs by the retailers to consumers and there is no law which binds any shopkeeper to provide any carry bag for free. Therefore, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP. The other averments made in the complaint have been denied as wrong and in the end, a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.

3.                To prove his case, the complainant tendered his affidavit as Ex. CA along with document Ex. C1 to Ex. C6 and closed the evidence.

4.                On the other hand, counsel for the OP submitted affidavit Ex. RA of Sh. Basant Yadav, Store Manager of the OP and closed the evidence.

5.                We have gone through the record and have heard the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties.

6.                It is not disputed that the OP has charged a sum of Rs.12/- on account of carry bags as is evident from the copy of invoice Ex. C1. It is further evident that on the carry bags, Reliance Fresh with the logo of OP company is printed. In Big Bazaar (Future Retail Ltd.) Vs. Ashok Kumar decided by the Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in Revision Petition No.275 of 2020 reported in 2020 in SSC (NCDRC) 495, it has been held that the consumer has a right to know before he exercises his choice to patronize a particular retail outlet and the complainant cannot be taken by surprise at the billing counter after he has made choice of goods he intended to buy that he had to pay the additional cost of carry bags. In this case, it is not the case of the OP that any such information that the costs of carry bags would be charged extra were displayed prominently anywhere in the outlet.

7.                Secondly, in Bata India Limited Vs Dinesh Prashad Raturi in Appeal No.98 of 2019 decided by Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal commission, U.T., Chandigarh on 17.05.2019 it has been held that if on the carry bag, the advertisement of the company is being published, it means that the company is using the consumer as if he is an advertisement agent of the opposite party. As per the law laid down in aforesaid cases, the OP has been found to be wanting on both the counts. The OP neither displayed prominently at the entrance that the carry bags would be charged extra and the carry bag also carried the name and logo of the OP Company. In these circumstances, in the light of the law laid down in the afore cited cases, it has to be held that the OP was not justified in charging Rs.12/- from the complainant.

8.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with an order that the OP shall refund the amount of Rs.12/- to the complainant. The OP shall further pay a composite cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

9.                Due to rush of work and spread of COVID-19, the case could not be decided within statutory period.

 

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:11.05.2022.

Gobind Ram.

Tirath Singh Vs Reliance Retail Ltd.                               CC/19/224

Present:       Complainant Sh. Tirath Singh Grewal in person.

                   Sh. Sahil Sharma, Advocate for the OP.

                  

                   Arguments heard. Vide separate detailed order of today, the complaint is partly allowed with an order that the OP shall refund the amount of Rs.12/- to the complainant. The OP shall further pay a composite cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only to the complainant. Compliance of the order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:11.05.2022.

Gobind Ram.