Tripura

StateCommission

A/1/2020

Big Bazaar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri. Manojit Saha - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Suman Bhattacharya

15 Jun 2020

ORDER

Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Agartala.

 

 

Case No.A.1.2020

 

 

 

 

1. Big Bazaar, 

Ground Floor, 1^st and 2^nd floor, 

Below: Rupasi Cinema Hall, 

Mantri Bari Road, Agartala,

West Tripura, Pin - 799001.

… … … … Appellant/Opposite Party.

Vs

 

1. Shri Manojit Saha,

S/o Shri Tapan Saha, 

Resident of House No.02/243,

Vill: Vivekananda Palli, 

P.O. Amarpur, P.S. Birganj, 

District - Gomati Tripura, Pin - 799101.

… … … … Respondent/Complainant.

 

 

Present

Hon’ble Mr. Justice U.B. Saha

President,

State Commission

 

Dr. Chhanda Bhattacharyya,

Member,

State Commission

 

Mr. Kamalendu Bikash Das,

Member,

State Commission

 

 

 

 

For the Appellant:                                                Mr. Suman Bhattacharya, Adv.

For the Respondent:                                            In person.

Date of Hearing & Delivery of Judgment: 15.06.2020.

 

 

 

J U D G M E N T [O R A L]

 

U.B. Saha, J,

The instant appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25.09.2019 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, West Tripura, Agartala (hereinafter referred to as District Forum) in Case No.C.C.46 of 2019 whereby and whereunder the learned District Forum allowed the complaint petition directing the opposite party, the appellant herein, to refund Rs.10/- being the price of paper carry bag to the complainant, the respondent herein, and also to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation as well as Rs.5,000/-  towards cost of litigation, in total Rs.15,010/-. The payment is to be made within two months from the date of judgment, if not paid; then it will carry interest @ 9% per annum till the payment is made in full. Appellant has also filed an application for condoning the delay of 83 days in preferring the appeal.

2. Heard Mr. Suman Bhattacharya, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant (hereinafter referred to as opposite party/Big Bazaar) as well as Shri Manojit Saha, the respondent, appeared in person (hereinafter referred to as complainant).
3. Today is fixed for order on condonation petition.
4. Ld. Counsel for the appellant-opposite party, Mr. Bhattacharya has submitted one prescription and the medical report in support of his illness as mentioned in the condonation petition.
5. Shri Saha, complainant has no objection so far the prayer for condonation is concerned though he has filed one formal objection petition.
6. In view of the above submission, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to condone the delay. Thus, the delay of 83 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and as agreed by both sides, the appeal is taken up for final disposal at this stage.
7. Before the learned District Forum it was the case of the complainant that he on 16.06.2019 (Sunday) visited the opposite party-Big Bazaar, Agartala, and purchased a jeans pant for a consideration of Rs.499.50/- with a discount of 50% from the original price. He was also made to purchase one paper bag for a consideration of Rs.10/-. The complainant noticed that nowhere in the bag MRP of Rs.10/- was mentioned and not only that, the Big Bazaar also used that bag as a medium of advertisement by way of having printed a caption on that bag “FBB” which according to the complainant attracts unfair trade practice and also deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party-Big Bazaar. The complainant in his complaint also asserted that the opposite party was supposed to supply a bag free of cost to its customers so as to enable the customers to carry the item purchased from their shop. Alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice by the opposite party-Big Bazaar, the complainant claimed Rs.70,000/- as compensation etc. and Rs.10/- being the price of the paper bag from the opposite party-Big Bazaar.
8. The learned District Forum served notice upon the opposite party, Big Bazaar, but the opposite party did not appear to contest the case. Therefore, the case proceeded ex parte against the opposite party by an order passed by the learned District Forum on 16.08.2019.
9. In support of his case, the complainant filed Affidavit-in-Chief along with three documents viz. two nos. of memos dated 16.06.2019, one paper bag of the opposite party-Big Bazaar and payment receipt/customer copy dated 16.06.2019, which were marked as Exhibit-1 series. He also produced the statement on Affidavit-in-Chief wherein he stated that what was submitted in his complaint petition, those are correct and he repeated the same. He also proved the documents submitted by him.
10. Learned District Forum after considering the complaint petition as well as the documents available before it, passed the impugned judgment.
11. Being aggrieved by the decision of the learned District Forum, the opposite party has preferred the instant appeal on the ground that the complainant without serving any notice upon the appellant filed the complaint petition and the learned District Forum failed to consider the evidence on record.
12. Mr. Bhattacharya, Ld. Counsel while urging for setting aside the impugned judgment would contend that it is an admitted fact that the appellant-opposite party after receipt of notice from the learned District Forum did not appear and contest the case. He further submits that the learned District Forum passed the impugned judgment for unfair trade practice allegedly adopted by the opposite party though there was no ground of unfair trade practice.
13. Mr. Saha, the complainant in person while supporting the impugned judgment would contend that in his complaint petition he has specifically stated regarding the unfair trade practice which would be evident from paragraph-4 of the complaint petition and in his complaint petition he has also specifically made a prayer before the learned District Forum for awarding an amount of Rs.70,000/- as compensation towards physical and mental harassment and litigation expenses and Rs.10/- as cost of paper carry bag and also for passing any further or such other orders as the learned District Forum may deem fit and proper. He has also submitted that when the appellant, Big Bazaar did not contest the case before the learned District Forum even after receipt of notice, hence, it has no right to file an appeal against the said judgment.  
14. We have gone through the impugned judgment as well as the documents exhibited. Almost a similar point like the point involved in the instant case came up before the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh in the case of Westside Vs Sapna Vasudev 2019 (2) CLT 403, wherein the appellant, Westside preferred appeal against the order dated 08.01.2019 passed by the learned District Forum-1, Union Territory, Chandigarh in which the learned District Forum directed the appellant-opposite party (i) To provide free carry bags to all customers forthwith who purchase articles from its Shop; (ii) To refund to the Complainant the amount of Rs.10/- wrongly charged for the paper carry bag; (iii) To pay Rs.1,500/- to the complainant towards compensation for harassment and mental agony; (iv) To pay Rs.1,500/- as litigation expenses and (v) To deposit Rs.10,000/- in the “Consumer Legal Aid Account”.

The Hon'ble State Commission, UT Chandigarh considering the case of the complainant and the opposite party therein upheld the judgment of the learned District Forum-1, UT Chandigarh.

15. We are of the opinion that the learned District Forum, West Tripura, Agartala did not commit any wrong while passing the impugned judgment considering the fact that the bag in question, the opposite party-Big Bazaar used a logo ‘FBB’ for the purpose of advertisement for business promotion of the said Big Bazaar, but according to us, so far the order relating to payment of Rs.15,010/- as compensation and litigation cost as well as the cost of paper carry bag are on higher side. We are of the view that it would be justified if the said awarded amount is modified to the sum of Rs.7,000/- as compensation and Rs.3,000/- as cost of litigation and also Rs.10/- for the cost of paper carry bag, in total Rs.10,010/-. Accordingly, the same is modified to the extent as stated above. The appellant-opposite party, Big Bazaar shall pay an amount of Rs.10,010/- (Rs.7,000.00 + Rs.3,000.00 + Rs.10/-) to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of judgment, failing which; it will carry interest @9% per annum till the payment is made in full.   

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. No order as to costs.

Send down the records to the learned District Forum.