BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.257 of 2019
Date of Instt. 12.07.2019
Date of Decision:13.01.2020
Jyoti Arora aged 46 years wife of Sh. Jatinder Arora resident of 239, Chotti Baradari, Part-I, Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
1. Easy Day Club through its Manager, Anmol Palace, Gurjeet Nagar, Garha Road, Jalandhar.
2. The Manager, Easy Day Club, Anmol Palace, Gurjeet Nagar, Garha Road, Jalandhar.
3. The Managing Director, Easy Day Club, 9th Floor, Tower C, 247 Park, Future Retail Home Office, LBS Marg, Vikhroli West, Mumbai-400083.
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member)
Present: Sh. Jatinder Arora, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.
OPs No.1 to 3 exparte.
Order
Karnail Singh (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that she purchased goods from the OPs on 09.06.2019 and the OPs charged Rs.3.60/- for carry bag, vide bill No.3461002000002963 dated 09.06.2019 and further charged Rs.3.60/- for carry bag vide bill No.3461002000002964 dated 09.06.2019. Both the bills are annexed with the complaint. The complainant requested the official of the OPs that he cannot charge the amount for carry bag as the same is unfair trade practice, but the person sitting on the cash counter misbehaved with the complainant and openly told her that if she dare to take any action she would face the dire consequences. The name of the carry bag has been mentioned as non woven fabric and when it was objected by the complainant, then the official of OPs No.1 and 2 openly told that this is system generated name of the carry bags. There is a great deficiency and negligence in service on the part of the OPs and due to that the complainant has suffered a great mental tension, agony and harassment apart from humiliation and further, due to negligence, deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for deficiency in service, negligence as well as for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and further, OPs be directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.33,000/-.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, but despite service, OPs No.1 to 3 failed to appear and ultimately, all the OPs were proceeded against exparte.
3. In order to prove her case, the complainant produced on the file her affidavit Ex.CA along with documents Ex.C-1 and C-2 at the time of filing of the complaint.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the written arguments submitted by counsel for the complainant as well as case file very minutely.
5. After going through the contents of the complaint as well as bills, it reveals that the OPs No.1 and 2 have charged Rs.3.60/- for carry bag upon two bills, means charged Rs.7.20/- for two carry bags and this factor is very well mentioned in both the bills Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2 issued by OPs No.1 and 2 to the complainant. We find there is no provision to charge for carry bag rather it is fundamental duty of the seller to provide a bag for carrying the goods to the consumer, without any charges, but in the instant case, the OPs No.1 and 2 have committed grave negligence as well as unfair trade practice by charging an amount of Rs.7.20 for two carry bags and in support of this version, we take an opportunity to refer a pronouncement of Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U. T. Chandigarh, decided in Appeal No.98 of 2019, date of Institution 17.05.2019, decided on 22.07.2019, titled as “Bata India Limited Vs. Dinesh Parshad Raturi” and further referred another pronouncement of Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U. T. Chandigarh, decided in Appeal No.24 of 2019, date of Institution 01.02.2019, decided on 18.03.2019, titled as “M/s Lifestyle International Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pankaj Chandgothia etc.”
6. If we see the case of the complainant in the light of above judgments of Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U. T. Chandigarh, then we can say that the complainant is entitled for the relief and accordingly, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and OPs No.1 and 2 are directed to pay compensation for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.10,000/- inclusive of litigation expenses. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
7. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jyotsna Karnail Singh
13.01.2020 Member President
