Shocked By Big Malls Not Allowing Customers To Carry Their Own Bags: Bengaluru Consumer Court Asks Ikea To Refund ₹20 To Customer, Pay Compensation

A consumer court in Bengaluru has directed Ikea India Private Limited to refund a sum of Rs 20 charged for providing a carry bag to its customer along with interest and pay a compensation of Rs 1000 for harassment and mental agony caused to the complainant.

The bench headed by President B Narayanappa expressed shock at the level of service provided by the large malls and showrooms by not allowing customers to use their own bags to carry their purchases from the store.

"If a customer wants to purchase about 15 in number. Daily-use goods/ articles like macroin pep, dettol, oreo, cop, urad, soap, toothpaste, shaving cream, pen, pencil etc. From different shops we cannot expect him/her to take 15 carry bags from the home for the same. Thus by not allowing the customers to carry their own bags along with the goods purchased to carry the same from the shop premises. We are shocked to note the kind of service provided by these big malls/showrooms. Hence taken into the consideration the OP is committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and the complainant is bound to be compensated.”

The complainant had approached the commission alleging deficiency in service on the part of the company and praying for a direction to it to pay a sum of Rs.20 along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date the carry bag was purchased and Rs.10,000, legal notice cost and Rs.40.000, towards litigation expenses.

It was claimed that she had on October 6, 2022, visited the Ikea store and purchased some items. She was issued an invoice after purchasing the item but was not given a carry bag and was charged Rs.20 for it.

It was averred that the Ikea failed to provide a free carry bag despite her requests. This act of charging for a carry bag with a printed logo amounts to an advertisement and is a spurious and unfair trade practice. Hence she issued legal notice on 17/10/2022, to which Ikea replied but did not refund the amount received for the carry bag.

Before the Commission, Ikea argued that the complaint was false, frivolous, and vexatious and liable to be dismissed. Further, it argued that the complainant had visited the store and purchased a few items including the paper bag. It is true that the complainant indeed used the paper bag product as a carry bag to carry some of the other products purchased from the store. The paper bag is not an essential item that all the customers require, to part all the other products purchased by them into a deliverable state.

It claimed that the paper bag is not an essential item all the customers require, the OP has a reputed brand across the globe and is committed to bringing in compliance with all the laws of the land. It does not indulge in any sale of goods that has any hidden charges or indulge in concealment of information from its customers or indulge in any practices that may be considered as a breach of trust or unfair trade practice.

Moreover, the information pertaining to all its products, including the paper bag are conspicuously displayed on various aisles of its store and are not automatically or suspiciously added to the purchasers at the time of billing, as the complainant herein seems to allege. The price of the same is sufficiently notified and it is open to the customer to decide whether or not to pick up the product from the specified place where the product is stored.

Finally, it added that it is the customer who picks up the product and takes it to the final billing counter. The goods are not delivered in any loose condition without packaging, therefore there is no deficiency or unfair trade practice. Hence Ikea prayed that the complaint may be liable to be dismissed with a heavy cost.

The Commission went through the records and found that the State Commission had held that all kinds of expenses incurred in order to put goods into deliverable state shall be suffered by the seller, as such, the contention railed does not merit acceptance.

“On the other hand purchase of the carry bag it made optional and their own carry bags containing some item/article intended to be purchased from other shop premises, we cannot expect that for every single item /article intended to be purchased by a customer. He/she needs to carry separate carry bags," it added.

Consequently, considering that the concerned party had failed to provide the expected level of service and engaged in unfair trade practices, it was found that the complainant deserves to be compensated.

Accordingly, it partly allowed the plea.

Case Title: Sangeetha Bohra v Ikea India Private Limited

Case No: CC No 73 of 2023.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment