Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/396/2019

Sri J.Ravi Kumar, S/o Late K.Jayashankar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Authorized Signatory/The Proprietor, M s Mahesh Motors - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.C.J.Lakshminarasimha

24 Jan 2020

ORDER

 

COMPLAINT FILED ON:11/07/2019

DISPOSED      ON:24/01/2020

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

CC.NO:396/2019

DATED: 24^th January 2020

PRESENT :-     Smt. C.M.Chanchala.            …. President

                                B.A.L.,,LL.B.,            

                            

                        SRI. SHIVAKUMAR.K.N    :              MEMBER

                     M.Com., LL.B.,

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	Sri.J. Ravi Kumar, S/o Late K Jayashankar, Aged about 33 years, Business and LICAgent, R/o. AmbaBhavani Temple, Kelagote, Chitradurga Town. (Rep., by Sri.C.T.Laxminarasimha, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTY	The Authorized Signatory/  The Proritor, M/s. Mahesh Motors, Authorized Dealer ofMoto Corp Limited, Mahendra Complex,  RTC Office Road, Chitrdurga Town.   (Rep bySri. H.T.Jaganath, Advocate)

 

Pronounced on 24-01-2020.

Written by C.M.Chanchala, President.

ORDERS

1.    This is a complaint of alleged deficiency of service filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 by Sri. J. Ravi Kumar, the Complainant against the Opposite party  praying  to pay or return the excess payment of Rs.98-00 collected by them, and to directed the  opponent to pay the legal notice charges of Rs.1,000-00 to the complainant, to directed the excise Department, GST Department and concerned authority to take the necessary legal action for collecting the excess amounts against the norms of the Government of Karnataka and for grant of Rs.25,000/- towards the mental agony, mental sufferings, loss of mental sufferings, loss  of mental peace, annoyance caused to the complainant by the opponent and also for  disturbance caused to the complainant by the opponent and grant Rs.50,000/- as damages to be paid by the opponent to the complainant for doing the unfair trade practice with other relief.

The Complaint:

2.  The case of the complainant is that, the complainant has came to the opponent show room along with his vehicle and also purchased Cushion Assembly i.e., Shock Absorber and Chain Sprocket on 16.12.2017 for which , the opponent has collected the amount of Rs.630/- and Rs.900/- respectively from the complainant. But the real and factual price of the said parts, are Rs.572/- and Rs.860/- respectively. Hence the complainant alleged that, the opponent has totally collected Rs.1,530/- from the complainant instead  of collecting Rs.1,432/- and there by the opponent has  collected Rs.98/- excess amount against the MRP as laid down in customary trade and practice. Hence he alleged deficiency of service and also unfair trade practice against the OP.

3.      After hearing on admission the complaint is admitted and  notice was ordered to be issued to the OP  to file his written version under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 ( in short “the Act) . The OP had appeared through its counsel and filed written version.

Defense:

4.    The OP has denied all the averments made in the complaint further he contended that the OP has maintained the show room and take care of his daily customer, promptly and honesty, without any remarks, the opponent forgotten to issue valid, bonafide reasonable reply notice, and non issuance of the reply notice was not intentional and it is  bonafide mistake. Further he contended that there is no fault on the part of the opponent, hence they prayed for dismiss the complaint. 

Evidence :

5.      The complainant got himself examined as PW-1 by filing his affidavit as a part of examination in chief and also got Ex.A-1 to A-6marked and closed the evidence.

6.    On behalf of OP AshfaqAhamed,got himself examined as RW-1 by filing his affidavit as a part of examination in chief and no documents have been produced before the forum.

Arguments:

7.      We have heard the complainant as well as counsel of OP and perused the written arguments filed by both side advocates.  

8.      The points that arise for our determination are;

1. Whether the complainant proves that deficiency of service on the part of opponents?

2. Whether the complainant proves that he is entitled for the relief sought?

3. What order?

9.      Our finding on the above points are as under;

          Point No.1: In the Affirmative.

          Point No2: In the Affirmative.

          Point No3: As per final order,

*******

Discussion and Reasoning:

Point No.1 and 2:

 

10. The complainant alleged that he has taken Shock Absorber and  Chain Sprocket on 16/12/2017, the OP collected Rs.630/- and Rs.900/- respectively from him, but real price of the said parts is Rs.520/- and 860/- inclusive of all taxes, thereby the OP has collected excess amount against MRP Rate, hence he alleged that the OP has adopted unfair trade practice in his business and also alleged deficiency of service on the part of OP.

11.    To prove his case, the complainant has produced true copies of invoice as EX-A1 Dtd: 16-02-2017 of the Chain Sprocket Kit passion which shows that the OP has collected Rs. 630/- plus inclusively  GST of Rs.68,91 and 14% of SGST of Rs.68.91. Further Ex.A-2 invoice pertaining to shock Absorber which shows that the OP has collected Rs. 900/-. Further EX-A3 is the true copy of the original rate mentioned in the document pertaining to Chain Sprocket Kit-Passion Plus shows that the MRP price of the said part is Rs.572/- inclusive of all taxes. Further Ex.A-4A3 is the true copy of the original rate mentioned in the document pertaining to Cushion Assembly i.e., Shock Absorber shows that the MRP price of the said part is Rs.860/- inclusive of all taxes. These  documents clearly shows that the OP has collected excess of Rs. 98/- from the complainant against the MRP rate.

12.   Under the weights and Measures (packaged commodities) Rules, all packed goods should carry certain essential information on the contents of the package, such as its Weight or volumes, the name and address of the manufacturer, the date of manufacturer, and in case of food packages, the best before date and of course the maximum retail price.

13.   Further under the consumer Goods (Mandatory printing of cost of production and maximum Retail price) Act 2006, certain guideline has been provided so that the  consumer cannot charged over to the maximum price printed on the goods by the manufacturer. These guidelines are follows:-

 1) Consumers goods mean all goods and items brought in the market for sale and are meant for the use and consumption of the consumers.

2.Cost of production means cost incurred directly or indirectly by the manufacturer in the production of goods.

3.Printingmeans printing of the cost of production and retail price at a visible place on the product in Hindi and English and the local language of the place it is sold.

4. Maximum retail price means such price at which the product shall be sold in retail and such price shall include all taxed levied on the product.

14.    The legislation has made it mandatory for the manufacturers to printing of cost of product and MRP on packaging of goods. Now the crucial question, which arises for consideration is “Whether GST can be charged where it price of the goods is mentioned as MRP?.Our answer is in the Negative for the above question following reasons.

15.    Admittedly the complainant has purchased Shock Absorber and Chain Sprocket on 16/12/2017. The grouse of the complainant is that the OP has charged GST on the MPR rate mentioned in the product. The above matter is squarely covered by the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition 3477/2016 passed on 4/1/2017. In the said Judgment the National Commission held that “U/s 2(d) of the Consumer Goods (mandatory printing of cost of production and MRP) Act 2014, the“ MRP” printed on the goods, a mandatory labeling requirement, at the relevant time, for pre-packaged goods means “such price at which the consumer goods shall be sold in retail and such price shall include all taxes levied on it goods. Thereby the defense of OP that they have charged  VAT as per law is of no avail in so far as the  issue at hand is unfair trade practice”.

16.    In view of the law lay down by the Hon’ble National Commission in the above noted cases we are of the view that the OP certainly committed deficiency in service and adopted unfair trade practice by charging GST, extra when the MRP is inclusive of all taxes. Therefore, we allow this consumer complaint with following order:

 

 

Order:

The complaint is partly allowed.

The opposite is directed to refund of Rs. 98/- with interest at the rate of 10 % per annum from 16-12-2017 to the complainant; OP also shall pay Rs.25,000/- towards fine amount for adopting unfair trade practice on their business and Rs. 10,000/- for the cost of litigation and compensation for mental agony and deficiency of service within six weeks from the receipt of the copy of this order. In case of non-compliance of the order the entire amount shall carry interest @ 10% per annum till its realization.

The assistant registrar is directed to send free copies of this order to the all the parties free of cost within a week from today.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, typescript edited, corrected and then pronounced in the open court this  24th  day of January 2020)

 

 

 

MEMBER

PRESIDENT.

ANNEXURE

Witness examined for the complainant side:

 

Complainant-J. Ravi Kumar has examined-in-chief by filing affidavit as PW1.

 

Documents marked for the complainant side:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Attested True copy of Chain Sprocket Kit-Passion Plus showing the price of Rs.572/- MRP inclusive of all taxes.
02	Ex-A-2:-	Attested True copy of Cushion Assembly i.e Shock Absorber showing the price of 860/- MRP inclusive of all taxes.
03	Ex-A-3:-	Original Bill of Tax Invoice dated:16.12.2017
04	Ex-A-4:-	The copy of Legal Notice dated 10.06.2019
05	Ex.A-5:-	One original RPAD postal Receipt
06	Ex.A-6:-	One original served postal acknowledgement

 

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of OP:

DW-1:- Sri. Ashfaq Ahamed, S/o Late Mohammad Hayath, Manager, customer care, Chitradurga Town.

 

 

        (C.M.Chanchala  )

                   President.

                                                         

 

 

          ( ShivakumarK.N.)

                                                                             Member.