BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.67 of 2020

      Date of Instt. 29.01.2020

      Date of Decision:09.02.2021

Rohit Age about 36 years R/O H. No.NB-266, Lakshmi Pura, Jalandhar City.

..........Complainant

Versus

Shoppers Stop Ltd. Through its Director/General Manager/Manager/Representative, Kartik Mittal, MBD NEOPOLIS Mall, BMC Chowk Beside Hotel Raddison, Jalandhar.

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Sh. Kuljit Singh             (President)

Smt. Jyotsna                   (Member)

Present:       Sh. Rohit Chopra, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

OP exparte.

Order

Kuljit Singh (President)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that he purchased goods from the OPs on 26.01.2020, vide two bills bearing No.3027 amounting to Rs.11145.40 dated 26.01.2020 and bill No.3028 dated 26.01.2020 amounting to Rs.4881/-. That the OPs charged Rs.7.00/- for carry bag twice total amounting to Rs.14, vide bill No.3027 dated 26.01.2020 and Rs.28/- vide bill No.3028 dated 26.01.2020 bills are annexed with the complaint. The complainant requested the official of the OP that he cannot charge the amount for carry bag as the same is unfair trade practice, but the person standing beside the cashier namely Kartik Mittal who is a departmental manager misbehaved with the complainant and openly told him that if he dare to take any action he would face the dire consequences. The name of the carry bag has been mention as 6SL PAPER/ASSOR/L/NCL with the sku code 8830665 and when it was objected by the complainant, then the official of OP openly told that this is system generated name of the carry bags. There is great deficiency and negligence in service on the part of the OP and due to that the complainant has suffered a great mental tension, agony and harassment apart from humiliation and further, due to negligence. There is no provision to charge for carry bag rather it is fundamental duty of the seller to provide a bag for carrying the goods to the consumer, without any charges, OPs have committed grave negligence as well as unfair trade practice by charging an amount of Rs.42/- for carry bags and as such necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP be directed to refund Rs.48/- excessively charged and further OP be directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for harassment and mental agony and further OP be directed to pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, but despite service, OP failed to appear and ultimately, OP was proceeded against exparte.

3.                In order to prove his respective version, counsel for the complainant produced on the file his respective evidence.

4.                We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the written arguments submitted by counsel for the complainant as well as case file very minutely.

5.                After going through the contents of the complaint as well as bills, it reveals that the OP has charged Rs.7/- for carry bag twice upon two bills, means charged Rs.28/- for two carry bags and this factor is very well mentioned in both the bills Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2 issued by OP to the complainant. We find there is no provision to charge for carry bag rather it is fundamental duty of the seller to provide a bag for carrying the goods to the consumer, without any charges, but in the instant case, the OP has committed grave negligence as well as unfair trade practice by charging an amount of Rs.28/- for two carry bags and in support of this version, we take an opportunity to refer a pronouncement of Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U. T. Chandigarh, decided in Appeal No.98 of 2019, date of Institution 17.05.2019, decided on 22.07.2019, titled as “Bata India Limited Vs. Dinesh Parshad Raturi” and further referred another pronouncement of Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U. T. Chandigarh, decided in Appeal No.24 of 2019, date of Institution 01.02.2019, decided on 18.03.2019, titled as “M/s Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pankaj Chandgothia etc.”   

6.                Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi recently has decided 14 Revision Petition Nos.975 to 988 of 2020 which have been disposed off vide common Order dated 22.12.2020 with the Revision Petition No. 975 of 2020 titled “Big Bazaar (Future Retail Limited) Versus Ashok Kumar” being taken as the lead–case. The Hon’ble National Commission in Para No.15 of the said Order has ordered as under:-

                   “The Opposite Party Co. through its Chief Executive is ordered under Section 39(1)(g) of the Act 2019 [corresponding     Section 14(1)(f) of the Act 1986] to forthwith discontinue its       unfair trade practice of arbitrarily and highhandedly imposing           additional cost of carry bags on the consumer at the time of    making payment, without prominent prior notice and information      before the consumer makes his choice of patronizing its retail       outlets and before the consumer makes his selection of goods for       purchase, as also without disclosing the salient specifications   and    price of the carry bags. The necessary notice/signs/          announcement/advertisement/warning should be in the place and     manner as may enable the consumer to make his informed choice         of whether or not to patronize its retail outlets, and whether or   not to make his selection of goods for purchase from its retail           outlets. The notice or information cannot be at the occasion of          making payment, after the consumer has exercised his choice to     patronize its retail outlet, and after he has made his selection of goods for purchase.”      

7.                If we see the case of the complainant in the light of above judgments of Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U. T. Chandigarh as well as Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, then we can say that the complainant is entitled for the relief.

8.                In view of the discussion made above, present complaint is partly allowed and opposite party is directed to refund cost of carry bag Rs.28/- to the complainant and to pay him Rs.2000/- as compensation for harassment and Rs.1100/- as litigation expenses and also to deposit Rs.5000/-in the Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission. This order is directed to be complied within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copy of order be issued to the parties free of costs as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Dated                                       Jyotsna                           Kuljit Singh

09.02.2021                                        Member                          President