State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Manjit Singh Sethi, Advocate S/O Tarlok ... vs Big Bazaar (Division Of Future Value ... on 8 May, 2012
1
First Appeal No. 503 of 2012
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB,
SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH
First Appeal No. 503 of 2012
Date of institution : 25.04.2012
Date of Decision : 08.05.2012
Manjit Singh Sethi, Advocate S/o Tarlok singh Sethi, 823, 8th Floor,
Lawyers Chamber, New Court Complex, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana & R/o
538, St. No.1, Harcharan Nagar, Ludhiana.
....complainant/Appellant.
Versus
Big Bazaar (Division of Future Value Retail Limited), Aerens Gold South
Int. Ltd. Qadian, Hacbast No.91, G.T.Road, West, Ludhiana- 141005
through authorized signatory.
...Respondent/OP
First Appeal against the order
dated 14.03.2012 of the District
Consumer Disputes Redressal
Forum, Ludhiana.
Before:-
Shri Jagroop Singh Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member.
Shri Jasbir Singh Gill, Member.
Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, Member.
Present:-
For the appellant : Sh. Munish Goel Advocate JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This is complainant's appeal under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order dated 14.03.2012 passed by the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as the District Forum) allowing the complaint and directing the OP to pay Rs.8,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation out of which Rs.4,000/- 2 First Appeal No. 503 of 2012
was to be deposited in the consumer legal aid account and the rest to be paid to the complainant. The complainant prayed for enhancement of compensation.
2. The case of the complainant is that he went to the premises of the OP/respondent and made certain purchases worth Rs.5404/- vide a bill no. T19/1329 dated 13.08.2011, when he came back to his house he noticed that the complainant charged an amount in excess of MRP on some items and they are guilty of unfair trade practice. He then filed the present complaint for compensation.
3. A notice was issued to the OP/respondent who opposed the same alleging that the complainant is an Advocate and was misusing the law for his own benefit. It was denied if they charged in excess of the MRP and ever misrepresented to the public. They prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. Both the parties were given opportunity to produce evidence in support of their contentions.
5. After hearing the Ld. Counsel for the parties and perusing the record, the Ld. District Forum allowed the complaint vide impugned order dated 14.03.2012 as mentioned in para no.1 above. The complainant has challenged the same through this appeal.
6. We have heard the arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the complainant/appellant and have perused the record, copies of which have been attached with the file to decide whether the appeal should be admitted for regular hearing or not.
3First Appeal No. 503 of 2012
7. It is admitted that as per the learned District Forum Rs.5/- in excess were charged from the complainant/appellant on the packets of Lipton ice tea (green tea) ( lemon & mint) vide Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-5 and Rs.19.69 were charged in excess on the T-Shirt worth Rs.165/-(wrongly mentioned as Rs.149/-). In this manner the complainant had to pay a total of Rs.24.69/- in excess of amount due from him. The total purchase made by him were worth Rs.5404/- and for this lapse on the part of the OP/respondent a sum of Rs.8,000/- has been imposed on it out of which Rs.4,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost are to go to the complainant/appellant.
8. In view of the above discussion we are of the opinion that the complainant/appellant has been sufficiently compensated by the learned District Forum and there is no justification to impose any further penalty on it. We, therefore, do not find any justification for enhancement of compensation as the compensation awarded by the learned District Forum is just and reasonable. There is no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed in limine.
(Jagroop Singh Mahal) Presiding Judicial Member (Jasbir Singh Gill) Member (Vinod Kumar Gupta) Member 08 May,2012 rashmi