O R D E R
Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao, President:- The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony; Rs.8,000/- towards expenses incurred in approaching this Forum; Rs.5,000/- towards other damages on account of selling milk sachet above the price printed on it.
2. In brief the averments of the complaint are these:
The opposite party is selling Tirumala dairy milk in Piduguralla. The complainant on 10-07-11 purchased milk sachet of 500 ml., for Rs.16/-. But the maximum retail price printed on the said milk sachet was Rs.14/- inclusive of all taxes. The opposite party informed that all shop keepers will sell the milk sachets in similar manner when questioned by the complainant. The opposite party even failed to give a receipt when asked. Milk is an essential commodity for all. On account of the above attitude of the opposite party the complainant suffered a lot mentally. The above conduct of the opposite party amounted to deficiency of service. The complaint therefore be allowed.
3. The opposite party refused to receive summons after receipt of notice for the reasons best known to him and remained exparte.
4. Ex.A-1 was marked on behalf of the complainant.
5. Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:
1. Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation and if so to what amount?
3. To what relief?
6. POINT No.1:- The contents of the affidavit and complaint remained uncontraverted as the opposite party remained exparte. The complainant did not produce any bill showing purchase of milk sachet from the opposite party. But it is the contention of the complainant that the opposite party refused to pass a receipt for purchasing milk. To prove his contention the complainant filed affidavit of one S. Azmathulla s/o Buran sahib R/o Piduguralla. On Ex.A-1 the MRP printed was Rs.14/-. Selling of any product above the MRP, amounts to unfair trade practice which comes under the purview of deficiency of service. It can therefore be said that the opposite party committed deficiency of service and has to refund Rs.2/- excess collected from the complainant. We therefore answer this point against the opposite party.
7. POINT No.2:- The complainant claimed Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony; Rs.8,000/- towards traveling expenses in approaching this Forum and Rs.5,000/- towards other damages. The compensation claimed and to be awarded has to commensurate with the injury suffered. The complainant did not mention what the other damages which he sought. The complainant did not file any document to show that he incurred Rs.8,000/- towards traveling expenses. Considering the merits of the case awarding a sum of Rs.500/- towards damages will meet ends of justice. We therefore answer this point accordingly in favour of the complainant.
8. POINT No.3:- In view of above finding in the result the complaint is allowed partly as indicated below:
1. The opposite party is directed to sell milk of M/s Tirumala dairy for the MRP printed on them.
2. The opposite party is directed to return Rs.2/- (Rupees two only) to the complainant.
3. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) towards damages.
4. The opposite party is directed to pay Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) towards costs.
5. The amounts ordered above shall be paid within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 26th day of March, 2012.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For Complainant:
Ex.Nos. |
DATE |
DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS |
A1 |
|
Empty Milk sachet |
For opposite party: NIL
PRESIDENT
