Sri Purna Chandra Mishra    - President.            

Complainant Aravinda Sahu has filed this case u/s 35 of CP Act-2019 alleging unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties for charging higher price on the liquors over and above the MRP and praying therein for direction to the Opposite Parties to refund the entire amount paid to them along with interest and to pay the cost and compensation of Rs. 20,000,00/- on different heads.

1.           Brief fact leading to the case is that the complainant went to purchase foreign liquor from the FL shop, Nuapada on 05.11.2023 along with his friends namely Probin Thakur, Sajan Barma and 2 others for purchasing Rock Ford Whisky and RIO beer. The Manager took Rs. 450/- for Rock Ford Whisky and RIO beer which is Rs. 20/- more than the maximum retail price printed on the body of the product. When the complainant requested to refund the excess amount, the OP No. 2 bluntly refused to refund the amount on the plea that he has been instructed by OP No. 1 to charge extra amount on all the brands of the liquor sold by him.  He also refused to issue cash memo being demanded by the complainant. When this argument between the complainant and OP No. 2 was going on, it has been captured in the mobile by his friend Sajan Varma. It is pleaded that the as per the excise policy of the Government that the FL shops cannot sale the liquors over and above of the printed rate and such conduct of the Opposite Parties violates terms and conditions of the excise policy. The matter was reported to the Excise Officers of the area. But, they did not act on the complaint lodge by the complainant and therefore, he was compelled to file this case before this Commission for the reliefs prayed for in the complaint petition.

2.           Notice was sent to both the Opposite Parties by Speed Post. But the Opposite Parties refused to accept the notice and it was returned by the postal authorities with the remarks “Refused”. As the Opposite Parties refused to accept the notice, it is held to be sufficient on them. Therefore, they were set ex-parte vide order dt. 22.12.2023 of this Commission and the Commission proceeded to dispose of the case ex-parte.

3.           The complainant in support of the case has filed the levels on the body of the products, copy of the Video Clippings in a pen drive, certificate under section 65 of the IT Act, copy of the Government guidelines relating to fixing of price containing 3 pages and the copy of the e-challan showing deposit of the required fee and the evidence of the complainant, Sajan Varma and Prabin Singh Thakur in shape of the affidavit.

4.           It is seen from the labels filed by the complainant that the maximum retail price of the Rock Ford Whisky for 180 ml bottle is Rs. 280/- and the cost of RIO strong beer is Rs. 150/-, the total of which comes to Rs. 430/-. We have gone through the Government guidelines of Excise Department wherein in Para 4.2.7, it has been mentioned that maximum retail price will be displayed on each bottle of FMFL, IMFL, wine, beer and country liquor and sold accordingly. The vendors are required to issue cash memo to all consumers and not charge above MRP failing which, the vendors shall be penalized with fine specified in Part-A. All IMFL “Off” shops and CL shops are required to display up to date MRP Chart. The complain of the complainant is supported by the evidentiary documents video clippings and the oral evidence led by him and corroborated by the eye-witnesses present on the spot which clearly drive us to the conclusion that the Opposite Parties have practiced unfair trade practices by charging a higher price than MRP and have caused deficiencies in service by not displaying the rate chart in sale counter and not providing the money receipt even after demand even though it is mandatory for him to provide a money receipt to the customer.

5.           The complainant has clearly pleaded that for the purpose of the enjoyment and amusement, he along with friends went to purchase liquor for self-consumption. The unpleasant situation which took place between the Manager and the complainant and his friends turned his pleasure to displeasure by the conduct of the Opposite Parties which is clearly evident from the video clippings submitted before this Commission which we have viewed. The complainant being aggrieved lodged complaint before the competent authority for necessary action and for the reasons best known to him, they remained silent and did not intimate the complaint regarding fate of the complaint for which he was very much aggrieved and harassed as he did not gate justice from the authorities entrusted with the duty of looking into such complaints.

6.           As a case of deficiency in service, unfair trade practices and harassment is clearly made out against the Opposite Parties, he is liable to compensate the petitioner for the loss and harassment sustained by him arising out of the conduct of the Opposite Parties and hence the order.

O R D E R

The complaint petition is allowed ex-parte against the Opposite Parties. The Opposite Parties are made liable for causing deficiency in service, practicing unfair trade practices and harassment to the complainant. The Opposite Parties are directed to refund a sum of Rs. 20/- to the complainant with interest @ 12% per annum w.e.f. 05.11.2023 till it is refunded to the complainant. The Opposite Parties are further directed to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs) only for causing deficiency in service, practicing unfair trade practice and harassment caused to the complainant. the Opposite Parties are further directed to pay penalty of Rs. 25, 000/- for not issuing a money receipt to the complainant to be deposited in the State Consumer Welfare fund. The Opposite Parties are further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10, 000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only towards cost of litigation. The order is to be complied within a period of 30 days from the date of order failing which the order as to cost and compensation shall carry interest @ 12% per annum from the date of order till its compliance.