Complainant Dr.Naresh Dhiman through the present complaint filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter, for short ‘the Act’) has prayed for issuance of necessary directions to the titled opposite party (for short, called the OP Vendor) to refund/return him back Rs.50,000/- (charged over and above the MRP) along with interest @ 12% PA besides Rs.10,000/- as litigation charges and another Rs.10,000/- as compensation for having caused him physical & mental harassment, all in the interest of justice and fair play.

2.      The case of the complainant in brief is that while renovating his residential House, he had purchased substantial building material from the OP vendor who has assured him of good quality at reasonable rates. However, the complainant realized but after having made the payments that he has been exorbitantly over-charged by the OP vendor and for some items even over and above the maximum Retail Price as printed on the packaging of the purchased material. The OP vendor was approached for refund and upon his point blank refusal the complainant preferred the present complaint with the desired relief duly prayed, as hereinabove.

3.       Upon notice, the OP vendor appeared through the counsel and filed the written statement denying the very prompt of any cause of action in the complainant’s favor along with the other allegations of excess/exorbitant charges over and above the printed MRP rates requisitioning for a strict proof and praying for the dismissal of the present complaint with costs. 

4.         The counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CW1/A duly deposing the allegations/averments etc made in the complaint along with the other documents exhibited here as: Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 including Ex.C9A. The counsel for the OP vendor produced the lone document Ex.OP1 being the affidavit of Piyush Mahajan duly deposing the denials to the total set of allegations as made out in the body of the complaint. We have carefully examined the material/ exhibits produced on record by the two sides, duly heard the learned counsels’ respective arguments and proceed ahead to adjudicate the present complaint under the provisions of the adjudicatory Act.

5.       We find that the complainant has successfully proved through the Ex.C1 and the Ex.C2 that the OP vendor has supplied him 18 Boxes of Ceramic Wall tiles Casa Bella Brand (Code 52061) for Rs.18,427/- against the printed M.R.P. (Maximum Retail Price) of Rs.550/- per Box i.e., Rs.9,900/- (for 18 Boxes) thus charging an excess amount of Rs.8,527/- over and above the printed MRP. The OP vendor has simply denied having charged any excess amount vide his affidavit Ex.OP1 with no cogent evidence such as Purchase Bills etc to support his deposition. However, the complainant has not been able to prove (beyond reasonable doubt) any other similar instance of ‘excess charging’ over and above the MRP to prove his claimed relief by way of a lump sum ‘Refund’ of Rs.50,000/- along with interest. Although, the other Bills & Order estimates produced as exhibits Ex.C3 to Ex.C9 are not supported by strict evidence of ‘excess-charging’ but all these in the light of the other material as available on the records and considered in its entirety, the deployment of ‘unfair trade practice’ at the OP vendor’s end definitely stands proved. Thus, we hold the OP vendor guilty of having infringed and bruised the complainant’s consumer rights under the Act.    

6.       In the light of the all above, we partly allow the present complaint and thus ORDER the OP vendor to refund back the proven excess-charged amount of Rs.8,527/- to the complainant along with Rs.5,000/- as compensation for having deployed unfair trade practices causing customer –harassment besides to pay him Rs.3,000/- as cost of litigation within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the orders otherwise the aggregate amount shall attract interest @ 9% PA from the date of orders till actually paid.

7.          Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to records.                                       

             (Naveen Puri)

                                                                                               President 

ANNOUNCED:                       (G.B.S.Bhullar)                         (Jagdeep Kaur)

February 18, 2015.                              Member.                                    Member.

*MK*