Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/855/2019

Ms Malvika Dadwal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Miniso - Opp.Party(s)

Anmol Jindal

29 Nov 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                                    ========

 

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/855/2019
Date of Institution	:	20/08/2019
Date of Decision	:	29/11/2019

 

Ms. Malvika Dadwal D/o Sh. Hardeep Singh Dadwal, H.No. 846, Sector 2, Panchkula – 134109.

…..Complainant

 

V E R S U S

 

Miniso, Unit 11, Lower Ground Floor, Elante Mall, Phase-I, Chandigarh, through its Manager.

…… Opposite Party

QUORUM:	MRS.SURJEET KAUR	PRESIDING MEMBER
	DR.S.K.SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                                       

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Anmol Jindal, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Opposite Party ex-parte.

 

Per Surjeet Kaur, Presiding Member

1.         Adumbrated in brief, the facts necessary for the disposal of the instant Consumer Complaint are, complainant had purchased certain items on 15.08.2019 from the Opposite Party against consideration of Rs.760/-. The Opposite Party had charged Rs.10/- for paper bag though the complainant did not intend to purchase it. As such, alleging that there has been unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party as the paper bag was never intended to purchase by complainant. Hence, prayed for compensation with costs of litigation.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Party seeking its version of the case. However, nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party, therefore, it was proceeded against ex-parte on 06.11.2019.
3.         Complainant led evidence.
4.         We have gone through the entire record and heard the arguments addressed by the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant.
5.         Significantly, the Opposite Party did not appear to contest the claim of the complainant and preferred to proceed against ex-parte. This act of the Opposite Party draws an adverse inference against it. The non-appearance of the Opposite Party shows that it has nothing to say in its defence against the allegations made by the complainant. Therefore, the assertions of the complainant go unrebutted and uncontroverted.
6.         The factum of providing paper bag to the Complainant, on payment of additional price, is proved from the invoice Annexure C-1.  
7.         Ld. Counsel for Complainant argued that the Opposite Party had charged Rs.7/- for paper bag though the complainant did not intend to purchase it and nowhere in the entire shop premises it was mentioned that the Opposite Party would charge for a carry bag. To our mind, it would have been very odd and inconvenient for Complainant to carry the items purchased in hand throughout without a paper bag.
8.         At any rate, charges of such things (paper bag) cannot be separately foisted upon the consumers and would amount to overcharging. In this manner, definitely and surely, the Complainant and other gullible consumers like her have certainly been taken for a ride by the Opposite Party.
9.         Undoubtedly, the Opposite Party has several stores across the country and in the above said manner, made lot of money, thus, the act of Opposite Party by forcing the gullible consumers to pay additionally for the paper bags amounts to deficiency in service and its indulgence into unfair trade practice.
10.         The sequence of the events of the present case, clearly establishes the high headedness of the Opposite Party of which the complainant became the victim and felt the burnt, as a result the complainant has been left with no alternative, except to knock the doors of this Forum, which further aggravated her pain & harassment. Thus, on this account, we deem it proper to penalize the Opposite Party for indulging in such activity, thereby causing not only loss, mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant, but also giving rise to undesirable litigation and thereby wasting the precious time of this Forum. Therefore, the Opposite Party is penalized with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited in the “Consumer Legal Aid Account” No.32892854721, maintained with the State Bank of India, Sector 7-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh in the name of Secretary, Hon’ble State Commission UT Chandigarh.
11.         In the light of above observations, we are of the concerted view that the present complaint of the Complainant deserves to succeed against the Opposite Party, and the same is allowed, qua it. The Opposite Party is directed:-

(i)      To refund to the Complainant the amount of Rs.10/- wrongly charged for the carry bag;

 

(ii)     To pay Rs.1000/- to the complainant towards compensation for harassment and mental agony. Compensation imposed on lower side as mental agony of parting with Rs.10/- could only be caused to this extent.

 

(iii)    To pay Rs.500/- as litigation expenses.      

 

   (iv)    To deposit Rs.10,000/- in the “Consumer Legal Aid Account” No.32892854721, maintained with the State Bank of India, Sector 7-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh in the name of Secretary, Hon’ble State Commission UT Chandigarh.

 

                This order shall be complied with by the Opposite Party within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall be liable to pay the amount at Sr.No. (i) to (iii) to the complainant along with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of filing of the present Complaint, till realization. The amount mentioned at Sr.No. (iv) be deposited in the account aforesaid, within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the same will carry interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of this order till its deposit. A copy of this order be also sent to the Secretary (SCDRC), U.T. Chandigarh, for necessary action.

12.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

 

	Sd/-	Sd/-
29/11/2019	[Dr.S.K.Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]
	Member	Presiding Member
“Dutt”