D.O.F:09/11/2022

                                                                                                   D.O.O:28/02/2023

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,    KASARAGOD

      CC.No.274/2022

Dated this, the 28^th day of February 2023

PRESENT:

SRI.KRISHNAN.K                         :PRESIDENT

SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                            : MEMBER

Vikash K.R,

S/o Savithri,

R/at Lakshmi Nivas,                                                                        : Complainant

Battampara,

P.O. Kasaragod,

Kasaragod Taluk and District

(Advs. P. Rakesh Thamban & Mrs.Ameera. A.K)

                                                                      And

1. The Manager,

Smart Bazar (Reliance Retail Ltd.)

First Floor, Square Nine Mall,

Opp: Muncipal new Bus Stand,

Kasaragod

Kasaragod Taluk and District,

Pin: 671 121: Opposite Parties

2. Reliance Smart Corporate Office,

Reliance Industries Limited,

Maker Chambers IV, Nariman Point,

Mumbai 400 021,

Maharashtra, India

ORDER

SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER

The complaint is filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, on the ground of unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party.

Facts of the case in brief is as follows: The complainant purchased certain household articles from the Opposite Party’s shop on 07.11.2022, among which a packet of chilli powder of net weight 250gm with brand name Kitchen Treasures (barcode No.8908008032061), as per bill No.104.  The MRP printed on the body of chilli powder packet was 90.50 only.  The complainant found that in the bill issued by the Opposite Party, the chilli powder packet was priced at Rs.98.80/-. The complainant enquired about the collection of excess amount, but there was no response from the side of Opposite Party No.1, instead, he was left humiliated and insulted in front of his friends and other customers. The above excess billing by the Opposite Party No.1 amounts to unfair trade practice.  The service rendered by the Opposite Party No.1 is deficient and there by complainant suffered mental agony and the opposite party is liable to compensate. Hence, this complaint is filed for an order directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation and cost. And also to return Rs.8.30/- collected from him in excess.

The notice issued to the Opposite Party duly served, but they remained absent and was set exparte. 

The complainant filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and marked document Ext.A1. The Ext A1 is the purchase bill issued by the Opposite Party No.1. The item of chilli powder packet of net weight 250gm with brand name Kitchen Treasures (barcode No.8908008032061) is marked as MO1.

Based on the pleadings, the following issues are framed for consideration.

1. Whether there is unfair trade practice or service deficiency on the

part of any of the opposite parties.

2. If so, what is the relief ?

For convenience, both these issues are considered together.

The specific case of the complainant is that the opposite party tookexcess amount for a packet of chilli powder than the MRP rate. The MRP rate printed on the body of chilli powder packet was Rs.90.50 only.  But opposite party collected Rs. 98.80/-.

Here the complainant produced the MO-1 together with the Ext A1 bill, which prove that the Opposite Party No.1took Rs.98.80/- for a packet of chilli powder of MRP Rs.90.50/-. The MRP means the Maximum Retail Price, which is inclusive of all taxes. The MRP on packaged products is governed by the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodity) Rules. According to this rule and its subsequent amendments, retailers, wholesalers and others should not sell any packaged product at a price higher than the MRP printed on the pack.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and in the absence of any rebuttal, evidence this commission is of the view that there is unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties. Both the Opposite Parties are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the complainant. 

This kind of unfair trade practice is actually an offence against the public at large and to be dealt with seriously.  The opposite parties are liable to refund the excess amount of Rs.8.30/- collected and to pay compensation for mental agony to the complainant.  This commission hold that a total of Rs.10,000/- would be a reasonable compensation in this case.

In the result the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to pay Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten Thousand only) as compensation along with Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as litigation cost to the complainant.

Time for compliance is 30 days from receipt of a copy of this judgment.

     Sd/-                                                   Sd/-                                                    Sd/-

MEMBER                                    MEMBER                                     PRESIDENT

Exhibits

A1: Purchase bill issued by the Opposite Party No.1

MO1: Kitchen Treasureschilli powder packet

     Sd/-                                                    Sd/-                                                        Sd/-

MEMBER                                    MEMBER                                     PRESIDENT

Forwarded by Order

Ps/                                                                              Assistant Registrar