- Home
- /
- Consumer Cases
- /
- Right To Know In Advance About...
Right To Know In Advance About Additional Cost For Carry Bags, Jalandhar District Commission Holds Easy Day Liable For Charging Rs. 10 For Carry Bag
Smita Singh
2 March 2024 12:30 PM IST
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jalandhar (Punjab) bench comprising Dr Harveen Bhardwaj (President), Jyotsna (Member) and Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member) held Easy Day liable for unfair trade practices for charging Rs. 10/- for a non-woven fabric carry bag without providing prominent notice at the entrance of the store. The bench directed it to refund the Rs. 10/-...
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jalandhar (Punjab) bench comprising Dr Harveen Bhardwaj (President), Jyotsna (Member) and Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member) held Easy Day liable for unfair trade practices for charging Rs. 10/- for a non-woven fabric carry bag without providing prominent notice at the entrance of the store. The bench directed it to refund the Rs. 10/- charged for the carry bag and pay Rs. 7,000/- as compensation and litigation expenses to the Complainant.
Brief Facts:
Mr. Rahul (“Complainant”) visited Easy Day's (“Store”) showroom to purchase groceries. Upon selecting items, the Complainant proceeded to the bill counter, where the store issued a receipt charging an additional Rs. 10/- for a non-woven fabric carry bag. The Complainant objected, contending that the store had no right to levy an extra charge for the carry bag and stated that it was the store's responsibility to provide it without additional cost. Despite serving a legal notice, the Complainant didn't receive a satisfactory response. Feeling aggrieved, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jabalpur (“District Commission”) and filed a consumer complaint against the store.
In response, the store alleged that the Complainant approached the forum with unclean hands, concealing material facts and harbouring ill motives for wrongful gain. It argued that it is not mandatory for customers to purchase carry bags from the store and asserted that the Complainant, aware of the cost, voluntarily chose to buy the carry bag. It further claimed that the Complainant, after billing, created a disturbance, threatening to close the store. It contended that information about the charges for carry bags was displayed at the store entrance. Additionally, it referred to the Ministry of Environment and Forest Rules from 2011, highlighting the ban on the free provision of plastic bags and emphasizing the provision of environment-friendly carry bags at a minimal cost. It contended that the Complainant's case was based on distorted facts and unsubstantiated allegations and requested the outright dismissal of the complaint.
Observations by the District Commission:
The District Commission noted that Section 2(9) of the Consumer Protection Act recognizes six rights of consumers, including the right to be informed about the price of goods or services to protect them against unfair trade practices. Referring to the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in Big Bazaar (Future Retail Ltd.) vs Ashok Kumar [Revision Petition No.275 of 2020], the District Commission held that consumers have the right to know in advance about additional costs for carry bags and their specifications. It emphasized that consumers should be informed before making their choice of patronizing a retail outlet, and arbitrarily imposing additional costs without prior notice is unfair and deceptive.
Therefore, the District Commission held that consumers cannot be surprised by additional charges at the billing counter. In this case, the Complainant was charged Rs. 10/- for the carry bag without sufficient proof of a prominent notice displayed at the entrance. The District Commission held Easy Day liable for unfair trade practices.
Consequently, the District Commission directed Easy Day to refund the Rs. 10/- charged for the carry bag with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing the complaint until realization. Additionally, Easy Day was instructed to pay compensation, including litigation expenses, of Rs. 7,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the Complainant.
Case Title: Rahul vs Easy Day
Case Number: CC/129/2020
Advocate for the Complainant: None
Advocate for the Respondent: Rohit Dogra