Punjab

Bhatinda

CC/22/253

Jagdev Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Vishal Mega Mart - Opp.Party(s)

Shanky Jindal

07 Feb 2024

ORDER

Final Order of DISTT.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, Court Room No.19, Block-C,Judicial Court Complex, BATHINDA-151001 (PUNJAB)
PUNJAB
 
Complaint Case No. CC/22/253
( Date of Filing : 05 Aug 2022 )
 
1. Jagdev Singh
#117, Sushant City-1, Near Kot Shamir, Bathinda
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Vishal Mega Mart
MC 98, Guru Kashi Marg, Near Civil Hospital, Mansa Road, Bathinda
2. Air Plaza Retail Holdings Pvt Ltd
Mookambika Complex No.4, Lady Desika Road, 5th Floor, Chennai, India-600004
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.L Mittal PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Sharda Attari MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Shanky Jindal, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 07 Feb 2024
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BATHINDA

 

C.C.No. 253 of 05.08.2022

Decided on : 07.02.2024

 

Jagdev Singh aged about 45 years S/o Gurtej Singh R/o H.No.117, Sushant City-1 Near Kot Shamir, Bathinda.

 

........Complainant

 

Versus

 

  1. Vishal Mega Mart, Bathinda, M.C. 98, Guru Kashi Marg Near Civil Hospital, Mansa Road, Bathinda, through its Authorized Signatory/Manager/Incharge.

     

  2. Air Plaza Retail Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Mookambika Complex No.4, Lady Desika Road, 5th Floor, Chennai, India-600004, through its Managing Director/Chairman.

     

.......Opposite parties

 

Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

 

 

QUORUM

 

Sh.R.L Mittal, President

Sh.Sharda Attri, Member

Present :

 

For the complainant : Sh.Shanky Jindal, Advocate.

Opposite parties : Ex-parte.

 

ORDER

 

R.L Mittal, President

 

  1. The complainant Jagdev Singh (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this Commission against Vishal Mega Mart and another (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties).

  2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he is a regular customer of opposite parties and often visits the store of opposite party No.1 at Bathinda for purchase of household goods. Opposite party No.2 is running business of selling different products under the brand name 'Vishal Mega Mart' and one of its store is situated at Bathinda i.e. opposite party No.1. Opposite party No.2 is the controlling authority of opposite party No.1 and is responsible for all acts, conduct and business activities of opposite party No.1.

  3. It is alleged that on 9.7.2022, the complainant visited the store of opposite party No.1 at Bathinda for purchase of different household goods. He saw that there was a scheme of “buy one get one free” on the 'Lifeboy Handwash Total 10' worth Rs.199/- and same was also duly imprinted on its pouch, (Ex.C2). As there was saving of total Rs.199/- in case of purchase of 'Lifeboy Handwash Total 10', accordingly, the complainant picked two pouches of the said product i.e. one + one under the impression that the same will be charged only for one pouch to the tune of Rs.199/- as per the scheme imprinted on the pounches.

  4. It is further alleged that the complainant also purchased different products and got bill of all the articles. Opposite party No.1 charged a total sum of Rs.3424.70/- vide invoice No.7700880012215 dated 9.7.2022, (Ex.C3) from the complainant. After reaching home, the complainant compared the products purchased by him with the bill and he was shocked and surprised to see that two pieces of Lifeboy Handwash (Batch No.340130) were charged for a total sum of Rs.393.18/- instead of Rs.199/- under the scheme of “buy one get one free”. In this way, opposite party No.1 charged a sum of Rs.194.18/- in excess from the complainant. The said pouches are still lying unused with the complainant.

  5. It is also alleged that thereafter the complainant visited the store of opposite party No.1 to enquire about the same, but it failed to give him any satisfactory reply and also failed to refund him excess amount of Rs.194.18/-, rather opposite party No.1 proclaimed that it has rightly charged the amount as per the computer generated system which amounts to unfair trade practice and gross deficiency in services on the part of opposite parties.

    On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to opposite parties to refund an amount of Rs.194.18/- in addition to compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- on account of mental tension, agony, botheration, harassment and humiliation and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.22,000/-.

  6. Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of opposite parties. As such, ex-parte proceedings were taken against them.

  7. In support of the complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 27.7.2022 (Ex.C1) and documents, (Ex.C2 and Ex.C3).

  8. We have heard learned counsel for the complainant and gone through the file carefully.

  9. Learned counsel for complainant has reiterated his stand as taken in the complaint as detailed above.

  10. We have given careful consideration to these submissions.

  11. It is already clear from the evidence on record that the complainant is a 'consumer' of opposite parties. Also as the scheme of “Buy one and get one free” was duly imprinted on the pouches purchased by the complainant, so the complainant made a bonafide purchase of the same in order to avail the scheme, but opposite party No.1 charged the amount from the complainant for both pouches. A perusal of invoice dated 9.7.2022, (Ex.C3) shows that opposite party No.1 has charged a sum of Rs.393.18/- instead of Rs.199/- under the scheme of “Buy one and get one free”. Hence, opposite party No.1 has charged Rs.194.18/- in excess from the complainant. It proves clear deficiency in services on the part of opposite parties.

  12. Moreover opposite parties have not come forward to contest the complaint of the complainant. Therefore, evidence of the complainant is unrebutted and unchallanged. There is no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant.

  13. In view of what has been discussed above, present complaint is partly accepted. Opposite parties are directed to refund an amount of Rs.194.18/- alongwith compensation of Rs.10,000/- on account of mental tension and harassment and litigation expenses of Rs.5000/- to the complainant.

  14. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

  15. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

  16. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

    Announced:-

    07.02.2024

    1. (R.L Mittal)

    President

     

     

    (Sharda Attri)

    Member

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.L Mittal]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Sharda Attari]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.