Chandigarh: Rs 70,000 relief for man charged extra amount on grocery items

Chandigarh, November 8

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has directed firms More Retails Pvt Limited and Fortune Foods Adani Wilmar Ltd, Ahmedabad, (OPs) to pay a city resident, NS Jagdeva, a sum of Rs 50,000 as compensation for charging him an additional amount on a pair of Fortune oil pouches.

While setting aside an order of the district forum, the state commission also directed the firms to refund the additional amount of Rs 44 that the complainant was charged, besides coughing up an additional Rs 20,000 to cover his legal expenses.

Jagdeva stated in his complaint before the district commission that on July 12 last year, he visited a More Retail store in Sector 37, Chandigarh, to buy some grocery items, including two pouches of Fortune Soya Refined oil.

The store reportedly charged him Rs 172 for a pouch containing one litre. He was charged a total of Rs 344 against the maximum retail price (MRP) of Rs 195 for each pouch.

The same day, Jagdeva visited another grocery store in the sector and purchased another Fortune Soya Refined Oil pouch of the same quantity. He was charged an amount of Rs 150 for the pouch. Notably, the More Retail store had indicated that the MRP of the pouch was Rs 195. He asked the store to refund the additional charge, but to no avail.

The complainant alleged that the act amounted to an unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.

The legal officer of the Fortune Foods denied the charge and contended that a fluctuation in the MRP is the standard business practice in the edible oil business. The officer stated that the firm has no control over the charging mechanism fixed by the retailer.

Jagdeva had earlier moved the district commission, but the panel dismissed his complaint in an order on July 3 this year. Not satisfied with the order, he challenged it before the state commission, which held the OPs guilty of adopting an unfair trade practice. The commission noted that the respondents did not cite any reason for the discrepancy in the prices. Thus, the panel observed that the OPs had benefitted themselves by charging the Jagdeva an additional amount.

Panel Sets aside dist forum order

While setting aside an order of the district forum, the state commission also directed the firms to refund the additional amount of Rs 44 that the complainant was charged, besides coughing up an additional Rs 20,000 to cover his legal expenses