By Smt. Beena. M, Member :-
This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:- The Complainant entrusted his mobile set LGH870ds to the Opposite Party for repairing on 15/10/2018. After the repair, the Opposite Party collected Rs. 929/- from the Complainant and issued tax invoice. On verifying the Tax Invoice, the Complainant realized that the Opposite Party charged Rs.150/- as CGST and another Rs.150 as SGST/UTGST. The Opposite Party has no right to collect Rs. 300/- as tax for the product worth Rs.629/-. When the Complainant informed the matter to Opposite Party and asked to return the excess amount he charged, the Opposite Party misbehaved him in front of other customers. The Complainant further stated that Opposite Party has no right to collect more than 18% as tax. The Opposite Party has only the right to collect Rs. 113.22 as tax for Rs.624/. But the Opposite Party collected Rs. 300/- as tax. This act on the part of the Opposite Party is nothing but an Unfair Trade Practice. Hence this Complaint.
3. After the admission of the Complaint, the Commission issued summons to the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party entered appearance and filed version stating the following contentions.
4. The Opposite Party challenged the maintainability and denied the allegations. Further pleaded that the Complainant is not a consumer as per the Consumer protection Act. No deficiency in service or unfair trade practice had happened from the side of the Opposite Party. It is admitted that LG H870 mobile phone of the Complainant was entrusted to the Opposite Party for repair. The Opposite Party stated that he had repaired the camera, Touch screen sticker and speaker which costs Rs. 309/- Rs. 150/- Rs 320/- respectively and thus Rs. 788/- plus 18% GST Rs 929.84 was charged. At the time of entrust, the Opposite Party’s technician Illiyas had prepared the bill and received the amount. At the time of preparing the bill, the price of the Touch screen sticker was not entered. But the total bill amount was correct. It was a minor error happened and it was not willful. On noticing the matter, the Opposite Party had intimated the matter to the Complainant. The Opposite Party further stated that no illtreat was there to him in the presence of other customers. Making use of the minor omission happened from the side of the Opposite Party, the Complainant demanded exorbitant amount. On refusing the same, he had made the false Complaint to avail exorbitant amount from the Opposite Party. The act of the Complainant is misutilization of the benevolent provisions of Consumer Protection Act. The Complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for in the Complaint. Hence the Opposite Party prays to dismiss the Complaint.
5. On perusal of Complaint, Version and documents, Commission raised the following points for consideration:-
1. Whether there is any unfair trade practice/deficiency of service from the
part of Opposite Party?
2. Whether the Complainant is entitled to get any relieves as prayed for?
6. Point No. 1 and 2 :- For the sake of convenience and brevity all points are considered together.
7. From the side of the Complainant, he has filed proof affidavit in which he has narrated all the allegations raised in the Complaint in detail. He was examined as PW1 and the document produced was marked as Ext.A1. On the side of Opposite Party, the Manager was examined as OPW1 and Ext. B1 marked.
8. It is an admitted fact that the Complainant had repaired the mobile phone from Opposite Party’s shop and that the Opposite Party gave the bill and charged Rs.900/-. The remaining question is whether there was any mistake or omission when the employee of the Opposite Party prepared the bill. The Opposite Party not challenged the genuineness of Ext. A1. The Opposite Party has no case that Ext. A1 bill is not the bill given to the Complainant by the Opposite Party. Ext. B1 is the document relied upon by the Opposite Party. By the perusal of the contents of Ext. A1 and Ext. B1, found that the contents of both documents are different and the hand writing also different. It is seen that in Ext. A1 there are only two entries in the Description column but in Ext. B1 there are three entries. Also, in the tax column, it is seen that in A1 has a charge of Rs.150 twice for tax, and in B1 has written only 9%. This cannot be seen as a mistake during the preparation of the bill. If there had been a mistake, the Opposite Party should have admitted the mistake and returned the excess money when the Complainant asked for refund. But the Opposite Party has failed to examine above said Illias to prove the contention of the Opposite Party. It is possible to believe that the Ex.t B1 document was prepared for the purpose of the case and there was an unfair trade practice happened from the part of the Opposite Party.
9. From a detailed examination and discussion of all the aspects, it is clear that the Complainant proved his case beyond doubt. The Complainant is therefore entitled to get the relief prayed for.
In the result, the Complaint is allowed, and the Opposite Party is directed to pay Rs.486.78/- (Rupees Four Hundred Eighty Six and Seventy Eight paisa only) towards the excess amount, to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand Only) as compensation and to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Complainant as cost of the
proceedings. The Opposite Party shall comply the above order within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the Opposite Party is liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum till realization.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 2nd day of June 2023.
Date of filing: 29.11.2019.
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
APPENDIX.
Witness for the Complainant:
PW1. Sheen Leo. P.M. Complainant.
Witness for the Opposite Party:
OPW1. Shain. P.C Technician.
Exhibit for the Complainant:
A1. Tax Invoice. dt:15.10.2018.
Exhibit for the Opposite Party:
B1. Copy of Tax Invoice. dt:15.10.2018.
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
