DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:  CC- 111 of 2021.

 

Smt. Simita Chakraborty,

W/O- Rana Gopal Chakraborty,

Ramanagar Road No.2, Agartala,

P.O. Ramnagar, P.S. West Agartala,

District- West Tripura,

Pin- 799001. …..................Complainant.

 

 

-VERSUS-

 

 

1. Store Manager,

Vishal Mega Mart,

H.G.B. Road, Melarmath,

Opp. of SBI Agartala Branch,

P.S.-West Agartala, P.O. Agartala,

Dist.- West Tripura-799001,

To be represented by the Store Manager.

 

2. Manager,

Air Plaza Retail Holdings Pvt. Ltd.,

Plot No.184, Platinum Tower,

5th Floor, Udyog Vihar,

Phase- I, Gurugram,

Police Station -Udyog Vihar,

Haryana,- 122016. ..................... Opposite Parties.

 

 

 

      __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA. 

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

For the Complainant : In person,

  

For the O.P.  : Mr. Saikat Rahman,  

  Smt. Debasree Das Kilikdar,

  Sri Victor Ghosh, 

 

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON : 07.09.2022

 

J U D G M E N T

          The Complainant set the law in motion by presenting the complaint petition U/S 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 complaining against the O.P. for deficiency of service. 

The Complainant's case, in brief, is that on 17.08.2021 the Complainant went to Vishal Mega Mart Shopping Mall, Melarmath, Agartala for purchasing some household items and wearing apparel. After purchasing those articles when proceeded to the cash counter for payment the staff of the cash counter told her to pay Rs.16/- for the carry bag. Though she had no intention to purchase the carry bag she was forced to pay the price of the carry bag by saying that the carry bag is mandatory. She contacted with the store manager from there also did not get any proper response for the extra charge for the carry bag. She also went to the bill counter for rectification of the bill but the staff of the cash counter misbehaved and shouted in front of the other customer. As the household items are necessary for her she was forced to pay Rs.16/- for the same. The complainant stated that for the act of the O.P. shopping mall she has  suffered mental pressure, agony and faced harassment in front of the other customer which was unbearable to her and beyond exception from such a reputed shopping mall. Hence this case. 

 

2. After getting notice form this Commission the O.P. appeared and filed written reply denying the allegations made by the complainant in her complaint petition. In their written statement they have stated that the complainant filed the complaint with baseless allegations and it is liable to be dismissed. Before the customer purchase the billing counter for billing the goods by the customer  are clearly intimated and made aware via signage installed at/ near the billing counter that the carry bags are available at the store at chargeable basis. In case customers do not intend to purchase the carry bags they can use their own carry bag. The O.P. also vehemently denied the allegations of harassment. 

  

3. EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE PARTIES:-

  No evidence is adduced from the side of the complainant but O.P. adduced examination in chief on affidavit of one Sumeet Chakma, Senior Employee of the O.P. 

 

4. POINTS TO BE DETERMINED:-

    On perusal of the Complainant and written reply  following points are to be determined:-

    (i) Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. towards the Complainant?

    (ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any compensation/ relief as prayed for?     

 

5. ARGUMENT :-

At the time of argument complainant was found absent. We heard Learned Advocate Mr. Saikat Rahman on behalf of the O.P. Mr. Rahman submits that complainant has failed to prove her complaint. So it is liable to be dismissed. 

 

6. DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:                                     

  Both issues are taken up together for the convenience. We have perused the complaint as well as written reply and the evidence adduced from the side of the O.P. In the instant complaint the crux of the allegation is that complainant was compelled to pay Rs.16/- for a carry bag. It is also alleged that illegal practice is going on since the inception of the Vishal Mega Mart at Agartala and they are selling cheap quality of carry bag in high rate without maintaining proper rules and regulations. Complainant has failed to adduce any evidence inspite of getting opportunity. As a result the invoice and the carry bag were not exhibited. Moreover, it is found that invoice is not legible. On the other hand O.P. denied the allegations and also adduced evidence by way of affidavit of O.P.W.1 and stated that all customers were made very well aware of the fact that the carry bags are available on chargeable basis with different variants as per the size of the carry bag. There is no compelling situation of the customer to purchase carry bag. 

 

7. In the instant case, complainant has failed to prove the allegations  by way of adducing evidence. So, complaint is dismissed. No costs. Supply copy of the judgment to both the parties free of cost.

 

 

Announced.

 

 

 

 

SRI  RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.