Gurgaon District Commission Holds Zudio Solutions Liable For Charging Rs. 10 For Carry Bag, Orders Rs. 15,000 Compensation, Rs. 11k Legal Costs
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurgaon (Haryana) bench comprising Sanjeev Jindal (President), Jyoti Siwach (Member) and Khuswinder Kaur (Member) held Zudio Solutions liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for charging Rs. 10/- for the carry bag from the Complainant. The bench directed Zudio Studios to refund Rs. 10/- to the Complainant and...
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurgaon (Haryana) bench comprising Sanjeev Jindal (President), Jyoti Siwach (Member) and Khuswinder Kaur (Member) held Zudio Solutions liable for deficiency in services and unfair trade practices for charging Rs. 10/- for the carry bag from the Complainant. The bench directed Zudio Studios to refund Rs. 10/- to the Complainant and pay a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- to the Complainant along with Rs. 11,000/- for the litigation costs.
Brief Facts:
Mrs Pooja Gupta (“Complainant”) went for shopping at Zudio Solutions Private Limited (“Zudio”) located on Sohna Road, Gurugram. The Complainant purchased five items, totalling an amount of Rs. 1104/-. Zudio charged an extra Rs. 10/- for a carry bag from the Complainant. Feeling aggrieved, the Complaint approached the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Gurgaon and filed a consumer complaint against Zudio.
The Complainant contended that this charge for the carry bag was unwarranted and constituted a breach of legal standards. Despite the Complainant's objection and assertion that such an additional fee was not legally justifiable, Zudio persisted in levying the charge. Zudio did not appear for the proceedings. Therefore, it was proceeded against ex-parte.
Observations by the District Commission:
The District Commission referred to the decision in Big Bazar(Future Retail Ltd.) Vs Ashok Kumar, where the NCDRC rejected the argument presented by Big Bazar that additional charges for carry bags were justifiable. The District Commission rejected the claims that such charges were necessary due to the cost or were sold at no profit and no loss.
The District Commission noted that Section 36(5) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 reinforces that, unless otherwise agreed, expenses related to putting goods into a deliverable state should be borne by the seller, encompassing the costs of packaging. The District Commission held that the practice of charging for carry bags by major retail outlets undermines the Consumer Protection Act's intent, potentially leading to a widespread trend of extorting money from consumers.
Consequently, the District Commission held Zudio liable for deficient services and engaging in unfair trade practices against the Complainant. It was ordered to refund Rs. 10/- charged for the carry bag to the Complainant. Zudio was also directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- to the Complainant for mental harassment and agony, along with Rs. 11,000/- for litigation expenses.