DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOZHIKODE
PRESENT: Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN, M.Com, LLB : PRESIDENT
Smt. PRIYA.S, BAL, LLB, MBA (HRM) : MEMBER
Sri.V. BALAKRISHNAN, M Tech, MBA, LL.B, FIE: MEMBER
Wednesday the 28th day of February 2024
CC.297/2022
Complainant
The Officer, In-charge,
Zoological Survey of India,
Western Ghat Regional Centre,
Jafferkhan Colony,
Eranhipalam,
Kozhimode - 673006
Opposite Party
M/s. Tinu Singh,
MS Collection, 603/2,
Regal Nest , Awadhpuri,
Near Regal Town, Bhopal,
Madhya Pradesh - 462022
ORDER
By Sri. P.C. PAULACHEN – PRESIDENT
This is a complaint filed under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
- The case of the complainant, in brief, is as follows:
The complainant is the Zoological Survey of India, Western Ghat RegionalCentre, Kozhikode. All kinds of purchase in all offices of Zoological Survey of India is to be made through Government e Market only. Hence all purchases including stationery items are to be made through GeM only.
- The complainant placed an order for 50 pieces of laundry soap (Wheel – 100 grams) with a unit price of Rs. 26/- and the total value was Rs. 1,300/- for the order. On 25/09/2022 the shipment was received and on verification it was found that the shipment had 50 number of wheel soap, but the MRP of the material was masked with black ink. When the mask was cleared it was found that the actual MRP was Rs. 5 only. Thus the total cost of shipment was only 250/- as against the order for Rs. 1300/-.
- The complainant contacted the opposite party seller, who had agreed to send a few more material to match the order rate. But the opposite party did not send the material even after waiting for 25 days. When contacted again on 19/10/2022 the opposite party agreed to send the material on the same day. On 27/10/2022 another set of shipment was received and on verification it was found to be 4 sets of laundry soaps with Rs. 104 per set (RIN 250 gram) and each set had 4 soaps (Total 16 soaps) with a total cost of Rs. 416/-. Thus the total cost of the items received by the complainant in 2 shipments is only Rs. 666/- as against the order of Rs. 1300/. The opposite party was again contacted and they stated that they had done everything from their side and no further enquiries would be entertained.
- There is deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party. Hence the complaint to take legal action against the opposite party for the unfair trade practice and deficiency of service committed through the Government e-Market and to pay compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- to be paid to the Government of India along with cost of the proceedings.
- The opposite party has resisted the complaint by filing written version wherein all the allegations and claims made against them are denied. According to the opposite party, the complainant should have taken market survey and placed the order through GeM. The complainant had knowingly masked the product with black ink to harass the opposite party. However, the opposite party had provided the correct material to the complainant and had paid additional charges of Rs. 500/- to the delivery couriers more than the cost of the item of the soap. If the materials were not received in good condition, the complainant could have rejected the material. But knowingly the complainant had done all stupid things and also to take bribe from the vendor all these false allegations are made. The complainant had approached the opposite party by the personal mobile number and pressurised the opposite party, which is a single lady firm. The allegations in the complaint are false. With the above contentions, the opposite party prays for dismissal of the complaint with an order to pay compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- to the opposite party.
- The points that arise for determination in this complaint are;
1) Whether there was any unfair trade practice or deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party, as alleged?
2) Reliefs and costs.
- The evidence consists of the oral evidence of PW1 and Exts A1 to A7 on the side of the complainant. No oral evidence was let in by the opposite party.
- Heard both sides.
- Point No 1: The complainant, the Zoological Survey of India, has approached this Commission alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party in supplying the laundry soaps ordered through GeM.
- Dr. Sreeraj. C.R., the scientist, Zoological Survey of India, who is the signatory to the complaint, was examined as PW1 and he has filed proof affidavit and deposed in terms of the averments in the complaint and in support of the claim. Ext A1 is the authorisation letter for undertaking legal action, Ext A2 is the copy of the letter dated 3/08/2022 of the Director, Zoological Survey of India for 100% purchase through GeM, Ext A3 is the sanction order and contract for purchase through GeM, Ext A4 is the photograph of the first shipment received, Ext A5 is the screen short of call history, Ext A6 are the photographs of the second shipment received and Ext A7 is the screen short of call history.
- The placement of the order and the supply of the items are not in dispute. The allegation of the complainant is that when verified the first shipment, the MRP of the material was seen masked with black ink and on clearing the masking, it was found that the actual MRP was Rs. 5/- only. PW1 has categorically deposed before this Commission that the shipment had 50 number of wheel soap, but the MRP of the material was masked with black ink and when the masking was cleared, it was found that the actual MRP was Rs 5/- only. PW1 was not cross examined on this aspect and his testimony stands unchallenged. Moreover, the complainant has produced Ext A4 photographs which are also not challenged. Ext A4 lends support to the allegation that the MRP was masked.
- The contention of the opposite party is that the masking was done by the complainant himself. The said contention is not supported by any evidence. There was no cross examination of PW1 on this aspect or contra evidence to disprove the allegation of the complainant. Moreover, Ext A4 is not challenged or disputed. No evidence was let in by the opposite party to substantiate his allegation that the masking of the MRP was done by the complainant or the staff, as alleged.
- The evidence of PW1 coupled with Ext A4 would prove that the MRP of the material was masked with black ink by the opposite party and the actual MRP was only Rs. 5/-. By masking the MRP and selling the product at a higher price, the opposite party has indulged in unfair trade practice and it also constitutes deficiency of service.
- The total cost of the first shipment was only Rs. 250/- as against the order of Rs. 1,300/-. When contacted, the opposite party made another shipment on 27/10/2022 containing 4 sets of laundry soaps with Rs. 104/- per set (RIN 250 gram) and each set had 4 soaps. Thus the total cost of the items in two shipments is Rs. 666/- only. It has come out in evidence that the rest of the materials as mentioned in the contract were received by the complainant on 14/12/2022, after the filing of the present complaint.
- As already stated, unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party stands proved. This is a fit case where the opposite party should be directed to discontinue the unfair trade practice and not to repeat the same. The act of the opposite party has resulted in delay in getting the materials and loss of valuable time of the scientists as well as other staff of the Zoological Survey of India and thereby loss to the nation, for which, the opposite party is liable to compensate. Considering the entire facts and circumstances, we are of the view that a sum of Rs. 50,000/- would be reasonable compensation in this case. The complainant is also entitled to get Rs. 5,000/- as cost of the proceedings.
- Point No. 2:- In the light of the finding on the above point, the complaint is disposed of as follows;
a) CC.297/2022 is allowed.
b) The opposite party is hereby directed to discontinue the unfair trade practice and not to repeat the same.
c) The opposite party is directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) to the complainant.
d) The opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as cost of the proceedings to the complainant.
e) The payment as afore stated shall be made within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the amount of Rs. 50,000/- shall carry an interest of 6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment.
Pronounced in open Commission on this, the 28th day of February, 2024.
Date of Filing: 03/11/2022
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
APPENDIX
Exhibits for the Complainant :
Ext.A1 – The authorisation letter for undertaking legal action.
Ext.A2 – Copy of the letter dated 3/08/2022 of the Director, Zoological Survey of India for 100% purchase through GeM.
Ext.A3 – The sanction order and contract for purchase through GeM.
Ext.A4 – The photograph of the first shipment received.
Ext.A5 – The screen short of call history.
Ext.A6 – The photographs of the second shipment received.
Ext.A7 – The screen short of call history.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party
Nil.
Witnesses for the Complainant
PW1 – Dr. Sreeraj. C. R (Complainant)
Witnesses for the opposite parties
Nil.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
PRESIDENT MEMBER MEMBER
True Copy,
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar.
